ENGLISH    COLONIES 
IN   AMERICA 


VIRGINIA,  MARYLAND,  AND    TUB 
CAROLINA^ 


\%    A/D.OYLE 

FEtLOW  OF  ALL  SOULS  COLLEGE,  OXFORD 


1  The  immense  variety  of  history  makes  it  very  possible  for  different 
persons  to  study  it  with  different  objects.     .     .     .     But  the  great  object, 
as  I  cannot  but  think,  is   that  which   most   nearly  touches  the  inner  life 
of  civilized  man— namely  the  vicissitudes  of  institutions,  social,  political,   !   { 
and  religious.' 

Dr.  Arnold,  Lectures  on  History. 


NEW   YORK 
HENRY    HOLT   AND    COMPANY 

1882 


'\C&£^4. 


-i  'f3/r 


V 


PREFACE. 


Tills  volume,  while  forming  a  distinct  work  in  itself,  is 
intended  as  an  installment  towards  a  complete  history  of 
the  English  Colonies  in  North  America  during  their  pe- 
riod of  dependence  on  the  mother  country.  I  hope  in 
the  next  volume  to  deal  with  the  New  England  Colonies 
down  to  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century.  I  have 
chosen  that  epoch  as  a  convenient  halting- place  both  in 
the  case  of  New  England  and  of  the  colonies  whose  his- 
tory forms  the  subject  of  the  present  volume,  because  it 
marks  a  distinct  break  in  the  administrative  system  adopt- 
ed towards  the  colonies  and  in  their  relations  to  the  Eng- 
lish government.  Moreover,  the  history  of  the  individual 
colonies  from  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century 
down  to  the  separation  from  England,  has  not  the  same 
interest  which  attached  to  it  at  an  earlier  stage,  and  thus 
the  different  settlements  may  in  a  great  measure  be  dealt 
with  collectively.  A  third  volume  will  include  the  re- 
maining colonies  and  the  history  of  the  whole  group  from 
the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century  down  to  the  pe- 
riod of  separation. 


vi  PREFACE. 

The  subject  is  one  on  which  I  have  already  written, 
and  I  have  in  some  measure  incorporated  with  this  book 
the  substance  of  two  smaller  works  of  my  own. 

I  have,  I  think,  in  my  notes  sufficiently  indicated  the 
nature  of  my  material  and  the  sources  from  which  it  is 
obtained.  I  must  not  omit  to  acknowledge  the  unfailing 
kindness  and  courtesy  which  I  have  received  from  the 
officials  in  the  Public  Record  Office,  and,  above  all,  the 
invaluable  and  ever-ready  help  given  to  me  by  Mr.  Noel 

Sainsbury. 

All  Souls'  College,  Oxford  : 
April  22,  l8S*. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 


Introduction 


PA  OB 

I 


CHAPTER   II. 

TTTE   UNITED    STATES   TERRITORY. 

Unity  of  this  territory    ...... 

Differences  of  soil  and  climate  ..... 

Difference  between  the  Atlantic  and  Pacific  coasts 

America  shares  in  the  general  movement  of  mankind  -westward 

Relations  between  Northern  and  Southern  America 


CHAPTER   III. 

THE    NATIVES. 

The  name  Indian           .            .            .            .  .  .  •          9 

Earlier  inhabitants          .             .             .             .  .  .  .10 

Two  views  of  Indian  character :  each  erroneous  .  .  .11 

The  Indians  a  united  and  homogeneous  race    .  .  .  .         1 1 

The  Indian  in  war  .......         12 

Want  of  organization  -    .            .            .            .  «  .  .13 

Positive  law  and  morality          .            .            .  .  .  .14 

Relations  to  the  English.     General  summary  .  .  .  .15 

CHAPTER   IV. 

AMERICAN   DISCOVERY   DURING  THE   SIXTEENTH    CENTURY. 
Pre-Columbian  voyages  ...  .  .  .  .18 

Navigation  and  discovery  before  the  fifteenth  century  .  .         18 

Opening  of  the  great  era  of  discovery    .  .  .  .  .19 

English  navigation  and  commerce  .  .  .  .  -         .         20 

Bristol  and  the  West      .  .  .  .  .  .  .22 

The  Cabots  and  their  first  patent  .  .  .  .  .23 

Their  first  voyage  .......         24 

Their  second  patent        .  .  .  .  .  .  .25 

Sebastian  Cabot's  second  voyage  .  .  .  .  .25 

26 


Vlll 


CONTENTS. 


Second  patent     . 

Voyages  about  1500 

Interval  of  inaction 

Thome's  writings 

Voyage  of  1527  . 

Hore's  voyage    . 

Progress  of  navigation    . 

Distant  voyages 

Outburst  of  naval  activity  about  T550 

Voyages  to  Guinea 

Voyages  to  Russia 

Death  of  Sebastian  Cabot 

Movement  towards  American  discovery 

Literature  of  navigation, 

Spirit  of  enterprise  in  the  West  of  Engl 

Stukeley  and  his  Florida  scheme 

Sir  Humphrey  Gilbert 

Frobisher's  voyages 

Gilbert's  patent 

His  first  voyage 

His  second  voyage 

His  death 

Peckham's  Discourse  on  Western  Planting 

Carlile's  scheme 

Voyage  of  Barlow  and  Amidas  . 

Raleigh's  first  colony     . 

Lane's  explorations  .     . 

Troubles  with  the  Indians 

Departure  of  the  colonists 

Grenville's  voyage 

Raleigh's  second  colony 

White's  return    . 

Attempts  to  relieve  the  colony  . 

Conclusion 


CHAPTER  V. 

SPANISH  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS  IN  AMERICA 
DURING  THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY. 

Prospects  of  colonization  among  the  nation*;  of  Europe 

Spain  as  a  colonizing  power 

Ponce  de  Leon  . 

Lucas  de  Ayllon 

Pamphilo  de  Narvaez 

Hernando  de  Soto 

Lessons  of  De  Soto's  failure 

France  as  a  colonizing  nation 

De  Lery's  attempted  settlement 


CONTENTS. 


Verrazani 

Carder's  first  voyage 

His  second  voyage 

His  third  voyage 

Roberval's  settlement 

The  Huguenot  settlement  in  Brazil 

Ribault's  voyage  and  settlement 

The  colony  reinforced  by  Laudonniere 

Hawkins's  visit 

Spanish  designs 

Pedro  de  Menendez 

Treachery  of  the  French  court 

Destruction  of  the  French  colony 

Dominic  de  Gourgues    . 


CHAPTER  VI. 


THE    VIRGINIA    COMPANY. 

Increased  need  for  emigration 

Altered  views  of  colonization 

Mace's  voyage  . 

Gosnold's  voyage 

Richard  Hakluyt 

The  voyages  of  1603 

Weymouth's  voyage 

Formation  of  tht  Virginia  Company 

Constitution  of  the  Company     . 

Character  of  the  constitution     . 

Preparations  for  a  voyage 

Captain  John  Smith 

Landing  of  the  settlers 

Newport's  explorations 

Troubles  with  the  Indians 

Smith  among  the  Indians 

Further  troubles  at  Jamestown 

Newport's  visit  to  Powhatan     . 

Smith  becomes  President 

Eagerness  of  the  Company  for  immediate  gain 

Prospects  of  the  colony  in  England 

Change  in  the  constitution  of  the  Company 

The  voyage  of  1609 

Discovery  of  the  Bermudas 

State  of  the  settlement  in  Virginia 

Departure  of  Smith 

Distress  of  the  colony  under  Percy 

Intended  break-up  of  the  colony 

Arrival  of  Delaware 

State  of  the  colony  under  him   . 

State  of  affairs  in  England 


CONTENTS. 


Advice  of  Delaware  and  Gates  . 

Sir  Thomas  Dale 

The  first  Virginian  code 

State  of  the  colony  under  Dale 

The  second  charter 

Capture  of  Pocahontas  . 

Her  marriage     .... 

Peace  with  the  Chickahominies 

Hamor's  visit  to  Powhatan 

The  French  colonies 

De  la  Roche's  settlement 

Champlain  and  De  Monts 

De  Poutrincourt  ... 

The  Jesuit  colony 

Its  destruction  by  Argall 

His  attack  on  Port  Royal 

Discussion  about  Virginia  in  Parliament 

The  colony  under  Dale 

Death  of  Dale    .... 

Pocahontas  in  England 

Her  death  .... 

Her  companions 

Yeardley  acts  as  Governor 

Argall  appointed  Deputy-Governor 

Formation  of  a  new  party  within  the  Company 

The  case  of  Brewster     . 

Argall  superseded  by  Yeardley,  and  Smith  by  Sandys 

The  first  Virginian  Assembly    . 

Its  composition 

Its  proceedings 

Increased  energy  on  the  part  of  the  Company 

Schemes  for  converting  the  savages 

Divisions  within  the  Company 

Opposition  from  the  court 

Southampton  elected  Treasurer 

Dispute  with  the  king  about  tobacco     . 

The  colony  described  in  Copland's  sermon 

The  massacre     .... 

Spanish  intrigues  against  the  Company 

Case  of  Butler  .... 

Case  of  Bargrave 

Other  influences  injurious  to  the  Company 

Nicholas  Ferrar 

Factions  in  the  Company 

The  Company  brought  before  the  Privy  Council 

Further  attacks 

Members  imprisoned     . 

Articles  of  indictment    . 

Appointment  of  Commissioners 


CONTENTS. 


XI 


l^ 


The  colonists  support  the  Company      ..... 

The  Privy  Council  transfers  the  government  of  the  colony  to  the  crown 

Attempt  to  bring  the  matter  before  Parliament 

The  patent  formally  revoked      ...... 

The  Company's  records  ...... 

Conclusion          .  .  .  .  .  .  . 

CHAPTER  VII. 

VIRGINIA    UNDER    ROYAL    GOVERNMENT. 

Change  in  the  character  of  subject 

Physical  characteristics  of  Virginia 

System  of  land  tenure    . 

Relations  of  the  colony  to  the  crown 

Attempt  to  restore  the  Company 

Distressed  state  of  the  colony    . 

Improvement  in  its  condition    . 

Dealings  with  the  Indians 

Legislation  about  tobacco  culture 

Disputes  between  Governor  Harvey  and  the  settlers 

Insurrection  against  Harvey 

Appointment  of  special  Commissioners  for  the  colonies 

Further  attempts  to  restore  the  Company 

Agency  of  Sandys  .... 

Proceedings  of  the  Assembly    . 

General  view  of  the  condition  of  the  colony 

Territorial  limits  .... 

Prosperity  and  contentment  among  the  settlers 

Exportation  of  food        .... 

Modifications  of  the  above  view 

Placemen  ..... 

Sir  Francis  Wyatt,  Governor     . 

Sir  William  Berkeley     .... 

Another  Indian  massacre 

Death  of  Opechancanough 

Submission  of  his  successor 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

VIRGINIA   UNDER   THE    COMMONWEALTH. 

■  Colonial  policy  of  the  Commonwealth  . 
Attitude  of  Virginia  towards  parties  in  England 
Absence  of  any  religious  contest 
Independent  congregations  in  Virginia 
Distribution  of  power  in  the  Virginian  Constitution 
Comparison  of  the  Virginian  and  English  Constitutions 
Position  of  the  Virginian  royalists 
Dealings  of  Parliament  with  Virginia 
Reduction  of  the  colony 


PAGE 
I78 
179 
l80 
l80 
l8l 
182 


xn 


CONTENTS. 


Terms  of  surrender        .... 

Increased  power  of  the  Assembly 

The  Navigation  Act       .... 

Dispute  between  the  Governor  and  the  Burgesses 

Decline  of  the  Commonwealth 

Berkeley  appointed  Governor    . 


CHAPTER    IX. 

VIRGINIA   AFTER  THE   RESTORATION. 

Change  of  system 

Fresh  interest  in  colonisation     . 

Berkeley's  instructions  . 

Discontent  and  uneasiness  among  the  settlers 

Restrictions  on  commerce  . 

Difficulties  about  tobacco 

Attacks  by  the  Dutch    . 

Dispute  about  the  forts 

The  hurricane    . 

Berkeley's  character 

Want  of  political  morality  in  the  colony 

The  Long  Assembly     . 

The  king's  grant  of  Virginia 

Grant  to  Arlington  and  Culpepper 

Popular  grievances 

Relations  with  the  Indians 

Outbreak  of  hostilities  . 

Nathaniel  Bacon 

A  fresh  Assembly  elected 

Its  proceedings 

Measures  of  reform 

The  insurrection 

Bacon's  success 

Berkeley  retires  to  Accomac 

Bacon  organizes  his  party 

His  project  of  independence 

Berkeley's  successes 

Burning  of  Jamestown 

Death  of  Bacon 

Overthrow  of  the  insurgents 

Attitude  of  the  Assembly 

Commissioners  sent  out  from  England 

Their  proceedings 

Berkeley's  death 

Report  of  the  Commissioners    . 

Peace  with  the  Indians 

Further  discontent 

Lord  Culpepper  appointed  Governor 


CONTENTS. 


xiu 


His  character     .... 
His  instructions 

His  report  .... 

The  tobacco-cutting  riot 
Culpepper's  administration  and  its  difficulties 
Lord  Howard  becomes  Governor 
His  instructions 
His  career  as  Governor 
The  revolution  in  Virginia 
Lieutenant-Governor  Nicholson 
The  church  in  Virginia 
James  Blair        .... 
Proposals  for  a  college 
Sir  Edmund  Andros  becomes  Governor 
"foundation  and  history  of  the  college   . 


CHAPTER  X. 


THE    FOUNDATION    OF    MARYLAND. 


Contrast  between  Virginia  and  Maryland 

The  Proprietary  system 

Sir  George  Calvert 

His  attempts  at  colonization 

His  conflict  with  the  Virginians 

The  grant  of  Maryland 

Character  of  the  charter 

Opposition  to  the  grant 

The  first  settlement 

Its  religious  character    . 

The  voyage 

Establishment  of  the  colony 

The  first  Assembly 

System  of  land  tenure  . 

Extension  of  the  colony 

Constitution  of  Maryland 

Primary  Assembly 

System  of  proxies 

Assembly  of  1638 

Assembly  of  1639 

Gradual  establishment  of  representation 

Dispute  with  Virginia    . 

Hostilities  between  the  two  colonies 

Action  of  the  crown 

Success  of  Maryland     . 

Difficultly  with  the  Isle  of  Kent 

Claybome's  new  scheme 

Legislative  system 

Penal 


CONTENTS. 


Laws  abont  religion 

Judicial  system 

General  character  of  the  laws 

Condition  of  industry     . 

Natural  resources 

Relations  with  the  Indians 

War  with  them  . 

Outbreak  of  civil  war 

Baltimore  conciliates  the  Puritans 

Immigration  of  Puritans  into  the  colony 

Disputes  in  the  Assembly 

Law  concerning  religion 

Surrender  of  the  colony  to  the  Parliamentary  Commissioners 

Troubles  with  the  Nanticock  Indians    . 

Stone's  attempt  at  a  counter-revolution 

Resumption  of  authority  by  the  Commissioners 

Outbreak  of  hostilites    . 

Fendall's  intrigues 

Baltimore's  petition 

Proceedings  in  England  concerning  Maryland 

Agreement  between  Baltimore  and  the  Commissioners 

Dispute  between  the  Proprietor  and  the  Assembly 


CHAPTER  XL 


THE    REVOLUTION    IN    MARYLAND. 


State  of  the  colony  after  the  Restoration 

State  of  religious  parties 

Other  element  of  dissension 

Murder  of  Rousby 

A  revolution  threatened 

Outbreak  of  hostilities  . 

Proceedings  of  the  victorious  party 

Baltimore  deprived  of  his  Proprietorship 

Disputes  as  to  the  Proprietor's  revenue 

Establishment  of  the  Royal  authority    . 

Nicholb-  1  as  Governor 

His  reforms 

Attacks  upon  him 

Rumors  of  Jacobitism  . 

The  Church  of  England  established  in  the  colony 

Restoration  of  the  Proprietor     . 


CHAPTER  XII. 

THE    TWO    CAROLINAS. 

Fresh  impulse  towards  colonization  after  the  Restoration 
The  grant  of  Carolina    ..... 


328 
329 


CONTENTS. 


Reservation  of  popular  rights    . 

Sir  Robert  Heath's  grant 

Emigration  from  the  other  colonies 

Various  settlements  within  the  territory  of  Carolina 

The  first  emigrants  from  Virginia 

Government  established  by  Berkeley    . 

Further  progress  of  the  colony 

Its  history  becomes  obscure 

The  Fundamental  Constitutions 

Their  general  character 

Later  changes  in  the  Fundamental  Constitutions 

Last  change  in  1698 

Actual  legislation  in  North  Carolina 

Condition  of  the  colony 

Rebellion  of  1678 

Deposition  of  Sothel 

Connection  between  North  and  South  Carolina 

Rebellion  of  171 1 

Troubles  with  the  Indians 

The  Palatine  settlement 

Execution  of  Lawson 

The  Tuscarora  War 

Records  of  legislation  in  North  Carolina 

General  condition  of  the  colony 

Extinction  of  the  Proprietary  government  in  North  Carolina 

The  settlement  at  Cape  Fear 

Sandford's  voyage 

Project  of  a  southern  colony 

Industrial  schemes  of  the  Proprietors 

The  early  years  of  the  colony    . 

State  of  the  colony  under  West 

Settlers  from  various  countries 

Scotch  settlers  at  Port  Royal 

The  colony  invaded  by  the  Spaniards    . 

Enslavement  of  the  Indians  by  the  planters 

Activity  of  Shaftesbury 

Dissensions  between  the  Proprietors  and  the  colonists 

Right  of  self-taxation     • 

Rebellion  against  Colleton 

Ludwell  appointed  Governor     . 

Archdale  as  Governor    . 

The  High  Church  party 

First  invasion  of  Florida 

Sir  Nathaniel  Johnson,  Governor 

Second  invasion  of  Florida 

Siege  of  Charlestown    . 

Attempts  to  enforce  conformity     * 

The  Conformity  Bill  vetoed  by  the  crown 

The  Church  Establishment  Act 


XVI 


CONTENTS. 


Charles  Craven,  Governor 

General  state  of  the  colony 

The  Yamassee  War  .... 

Poverty  of  the  colony      .... 

Political  disputes  between  the  settlers  and  the  Proprietor 

Attack  upon  Trott  .... 

An  agent  sent  to  England 

An  association  formed  against  the  Proprietors 

Overthrow  of  the  Proprietary  government 

General  character  of  this  revolution 


372 
372 
373 
375 
376 
377 
377 
377 
379 
380 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE  SOCIAL  AND  ECONOMICAL  LIFE  OF  THE  SOUTHERN  COLONIES. 


Uniform  character  of  the  Southern  colonies 

38i 

Early  forms  of  slavery    .            .            .            .            .... 

382 

Kidnapping 

. 

383 

Establishment  of  negro  slavery  . 

. 

385 

Moral  feeling  about  slavery 

. 

389 

Legislation  about  slavery 

. 

389 

Religious  status  of  the  negro 

. 

39i 

J  General  influence  of  slavery 

39i 

Development  of  an  aristocracy    . 

39i 

Social  life  of  the  Southern  colonies 

392 

Want  of  coinage 

39? 

Want  of  education 

. 

394 

Compensatory  advantages  of  slavery 

. 

394 

Aristocratic  feeling 

. 

395 

Peculiarities  of  South  Carolina    . 

. 

•     39S 

APPENDICES. 

Appendix  A. — The  name  Indian            .... 

•     397 

B. — Hereditary  succession  among  the  Indians 

398 

C. — The  Cabots  and  their  voyages     . 

■    399 

D. — The  Contractation  House  at  Seville       • 

407 

E. — Captain  John  Smith                     •           .            . 

.    407 

INDEX  . 

•            •            •            • 

•     413 

m^b 


THE  ENGLISH  IN  AMERICA. 


CHAPTER  I. 

INTRODUCTION. 


The  aim  of  this  book  is  to  describe  and  explain  the  process  by 
which  a  few  scatterecLccJonies  along  the  Atlantic  sea-board  grew 
into  that  vast  confederate  republic,  the  United  States  of  America. 
This  subject  offers  little  that  can  strictly  be  called  new  or  untrod- 
den ground,  and  it  may  seem  that  no  valid  excuse  can  be  given 
for  entering  on  it  afresh.  Each  colony  has  had  its  own  historian  ; 
the  collective  history  of  the  whole  confederation  has  more  than 
once  been  told.  Yet  I  venture  to  think  that  in  such  a  field  there 
is  room  for  many  laborers.  So  vast  is  the  subject,  so  numerous 
are  its  aspects,  so  many  and  varied  are  the  points  of  view  from 
which  it  may  be  regarded,  that  each  student  may  dare  to 
hope  that  he  can  throw  some  fresh  light  on  the  matter.  Some 
may  be  most  impressed  by  the  romance  of  early  colonial  history, 
with  its  struggles  against  the  designs  of  bloodthirsty  men  and  the 
hardships  of  the  wilderness.  Others  may  be  drawn  by  special 
sympathy  and  admiration  towards  those  steadfast  men  who,  with 
unwearied  patience  and  stern  disregard'  for  their  own  temporal 
happiness  and  for  that  of  others,  strove  to  build  up  a  religious 
commonwealth,  freed  from  what  they  deemed  the  corruptions  of 
the  Old  World.  Though  I  have  necessarily  touched  on  both  these 
subjects,  neither  of  them  forms  the  staple  of  my  work.  T  have 
preferred  to  regard  the  history  of  the  United  States  as  the  trans- 
plantation of  English  ideas  and  institutions  to  a  distant  soil,  and 
the  adaptation  of  them  to  new  wants  and  altered  modes  of  life. 
That  history  differs  in  one  important  point  from  that  of  any  other 

i 


2  INTRODUCTION. 

nation  of  equal  greatness.  So  far  as  the  American  colonies  form 
communities  separate  from  the  mother  country,  we  can  trace  their 
life  and  institutions  from  the  very  fountain-head.  In  their  case 
we  can  see  those  stages  of  growth  going  on  under  our  very  eyes 
which  elsewhere  can  only  be  traced  out  imperfectly  and  obscurely. 
It  is  true  that  this  statement  needs  one  important  modification. 
The  history  of  the  American  colonies  is  in  one  sense  nothing 
more  than  a  continuation'  of  English  history.  In  it  we  see  a' 
certain  section,  or  rather  certain  sections,  of  English  society 
transplanted  to  a  foreign  soil,  withdrawn  from  many  of  the  in- 
fluences which  determined  the  development  of  the  nation  at 
home,  and  exposed  to  many  new  and  peculiar  conditions.  But 
we  must  never  forget  that  an  English  colony  of  the  seventeenth 
century  was  not,  like  a  Greek  colony,  a  ready-made  common- 
wealth with  all  its  social  and  political  institutions  moulded  for  it 
before  it  sailed  from  its  native  shore.  The  American  colonies 
were  at  the  outset  small  communities  of  Englishmen  practically 
free  to  shape  their  own  institutions  and  mode  of  life  within  cer- 
tain wide  and  elastic  limits.  The  colonies  did  indeed  one  and  ill 
form  for  themselves  institutions  closely  resembling  those  o't  ttie 
mother  country.  But  these  institutions  were  developed,  not  trans- 
planted or  servilely  copied.  That  process  of  development  will 
form  the  main  subject  of  this  book.  The  interest  attaching  to 
this  inquiry  is  twofold.  The  early  history  of  the  American  colo- 
nies is  all-important  as  an  introduction  to  the  history  of  the  Fed- 
eral Republic.  It  is  also  of  great  value  as  illustrating  those 
principles  which  govern  the  origin  and  growth  of  political  insti- 
tutions. From  the  first  point  of  view  its  interest  is  obvious.  No 
one  can  be  insensible  to  the  charm  which  surrounds  the  cradle 
of  a  great  nation.  The  other  side  of  the  question  has  an  inter- 
est less  evident,  but  not  less  real.  To  watch  the  growth  of 
a  constitution  in  the  broad  light  of  day  is  a  privilege  seldom 
granted  to  the  student  of  history.  He  can  indeed  study  the 
manufacture  of  constitutions  in  plenty.  But  that  far  more  in- 
structive process  by  which  a  young  and  vigorous  community 
frames,  almost  unconsciously,  institutions  suited  to  its  growing 
wants  has  generally  to  be  spelled  out  with  toil  and  difficulty,  and 
is  often  even  at  last  but  imperfectly  understood.  In  the  case  of 
the  American  colonies  we  see  the  process  going  on  around  us  in 
full  activity  under  varying  social  and  economical  influences. 
It  may  seem  to  some  that  when  I  took  this  view  of  my  subject 


INTRODUCTION.  3 

I  might  have  abstained  from  cumbering  my  pages  with  topics 
that  do  not  directly  bear  on  the  main  issue,  and  that  I  might  have 
strictly  confined  myself  to  the  constitutional  development  of  the 
several  States.  To  this  I  would  answer  that  institutions  can  be 
but  imperfectly  understood  when  detached  from  the  daily  life  and 
the  individual  characters  of  the  men  who  mould  them,  and  from 
those  external  conditions  by  which  their  action  is  controlled  and 
modified.  Constitutional  history  is  but  an  aspect  of  national  life, 
and  we  cannot  justly  comprehend  a  part  unless  we  have  before 
us  at  least  an  outline  of  the  whole.  The  same  defense  may,  I 
think,  be  urged  for  what  may  be  called  the  outlying  parts  of  my 
subject.  The  habits,  temper,  and  tribal  organization  of  the  sav- 
ages had  no  small  share  in  determining  the  social  life  and  polit- 
ical development  of  the  colonists,  and  their  relations  to  the  mother 
country.  The  efforts  of  the  sixteenth  century,  the  settlements 
of  Gilbert  and  Raleigh,  even  the  abortive  efforts  of  Hore  and 
Frobisher,  were  a  distinct  step  in  the  slow  and  painful  process  by 
which  England  peopled  the  shores  of  North  America.  Familiar 
they  may  be,  yet  if  the  reader  is  to  go  along  with  the  historian, 
and  to  enter  into  his  views  with  sympathetic  comprehension,  he 
must  see  the  whole  subject  in  that  light  in  which  it  presents  itself 
to"  the  writer.  No  doubt  it  is  difficult  to  adopt  such  a  method, 
and  wholly  to  avoid  discursive  writing  and  irrelevant  detail.  Yet 
a  different  method  would  have  its  own  dangers,  nor  can  the  his- 
torian expect  to  avoid  those  difficulties  which  beset  every  form  of 
literary  composition. 

Something,  perhaps,  might  here  be  said  as  to  the  arrangement 
adopted  in  this  work.  The  several  colonies  are  treated  as  sep- 
arate and  distinct  down  to  a  period  when  the  similarity  of  their 
relations  to  the  mother  country,  and  the  identity  of  their  interests 
allow  them  to  be  dealt  with  collectively.  Any  attempt  to  com- 
bine the  history  of  the  various  colonies  from  the  outset  into  one 
connected  narrative  would  have  involved  such  frequent  and  rapid 
transitions  as  must  have  completely  broken  the  sequence  of  events 
and  marred  their  significance.  Yet  there  are  numerous  points  of 
contact,  and  these  necessarily  involve  some  violation  of  the  pre- 
scribed method.  In  dealing  with  any  episode  which  concerns 
two  separate  colonies,  I  have  judged  it  best  to  apportion  it  to 
that  one  on  whose  fortunes  it  had  the  most  direct  influence. 
Thus,  for  example,  the  boundary  disputes  between  Virginia  and 
Maryland  were  matters  of  minor  importance  to  the  former  colon}-. 


4  INTRODUCTION. 

They  sink  into  insignificance  beside  the  struggles  and  downfall 
of  the  Virginia  Company,  the  early  constitutional  development 
of  the  colony,  and  the  bloody  feuds  with  the  savages.  On  the 
other  hand,  these  disputes  are  inseparably  blended  with  the  consti- 
tutional history  and  the  internal  development  of  Maryland.  Yet 
such  a  test  sometimes  fails,  and  there  are  instances  where  the 
selection  must  be  almost  arbitrary.  In  such  cases  a  writer  can- 
not hope  that  his  decision  will  be  universally  considered  the  best. 
It  must  be  enough  if  his  arrangement  be  not  distinctly  and  obvi- 
ously ill-chosen. 

I  should,  perhaps,  here  say  a  word  as  to  the  principle  by 
which  I  have  been  guided  in  giving  references.  I  have  endeav- 
ored, as  far  as  may  be,  to  show  the  reader  the  process  by  which 
the  book  has  been  built  up  step  by  step.  In  a  work  of  this 
length  there  will  probably  not  be  a  single  careful  reader  who  will 
invariably  put  the  same  construction  on  evidence  as  I  have  done. 
I  have  endeavored,  as  far  as  may  be,  to  give  the  materials,  from 
which  my  readers  may  form  an  independent  judgment,  whether 
in  approval  or  condemnation  of  my  own  verdict. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE  UNITED  STATES  TERRITORY. 

It  will  be  most  convenient  to  deal  with  the  internal  geogra- 
phy of  the  United  States  territory  at  a  later  stage  of  this  work. 
Unity  of  The  productive  resources  of  the  various  regions,  their 
stItYsmted  peculiarities  of  climate,  and  their  facilities  for  water  or 
territory.  jan(j  carriage,  have  exercised  an  important  influence  on 
the  development  of  the  several  States,  and  form  so  large  a  part 
of  their  history  that  they  may  most  fitly  be  considered  in  connec- 
tion with  each  separately.  At  the  same  time,  the  territory  of  the 
United  States  admits  of  being  viewed  as  a  whole,  in  relation  both 
to  the  rest  of  the  American  continent  and  to  the  Old  World. 
The  tract  bounded  by  the  Atlantic  on  the  east,  the  St.  Law- 
rence and  the  Canadian  lakes  on  the  north,  and  the  furthest  lim- 
its of  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  valleys  on  the  west  and  south, 
seems  marked  out  by  nature  as  the  home  of  a  great  nation. 
These  boundaries  have  indeed  proved  too  narrow  for  the  grow- 
ing spirit  of  the  Western  Republic.  Yet  in  one  sense  they  form 
a  natural  limit.  If  the  United  States  territory  had  never  ex- 
panded beyond  them  it  might  have  been  looked  upon  as  com- 
plete and  homogeneous;  it  could  hardly  have  been  so  had  it 
stopped  short  of  them.  Nature  has  endowed  this  region  with 
all  the  physical  conditions  requisite  for  unity.  Its  most  distant 
parts  are  bound  together  by  great  waterways,  and  it  has  within 
itself  all  the  resources  needful  for  national  prosperity.  Till  the 
Rocky  Mountains  are  reached  there  are  no  isolated  territories, 
no  hill-girt  valleys  fitted  to  become  the  homes  of  independent 
States.  Another  feature  which  goes  far  to  make  national  unity 
indispensable  to  the  prosperity  of  North  America,  is  the  peculiar 
position  of  the  Mississippi.  That  river  forms  a  great  national 
highway,  connecting  the  North-West  with  the  South.      As  the 

5 


6  THE  UNITED  STATES  TERRITORY. 

tide  of  migration  rolls  on  from  the  coast -line  westward,  so  does 
the  possession  of  the  lower  Mississippi  become  more  and  more 
essential  to  the  well-being  of  the  North. 

At  the  same  time  we  must  not  overlook  the  fact  that  within 
the  territory  thus  united  by  natural  formation  and  community  of 
Differences  resources  there  are  wide  diversities.  In  the  North  we 
climate,  have  a  soil  suited  to,  and  indeed  requiring  free  labor, 
and  a  climate  subject  neither  to  enervating  heat  nor  depressing 
cold.  In  such  a  land  subsistence  must  be  won  from  the  reluc- 
tant earth  by  willing  and  intelligent  husbandry,  and  prosperity 
of  a  high  order  can  only  be  attained  when  that  husbandry  is  sup- 
plemented by  the  skill  of  the  craftsman  and  the  merchant.  In 
the  South,  on  the  other  hand,  we  have  physical  conditions  which 
at  once  narrow  man's  wants,  and  lessen  the  toil  whereby  they 
are  supplied ;  a  climate  which  enables  him  to  support  life  on  a 
little  vegetable  food,  scantily  clad  and  slightly  housed,  and  a  soil 
which  satisfies  these  simple  needs  almost  without  labor.  In  the 
North,  then,  we  have  an  appointed  home  for  free  and  progressive 
communities  ;  in  the  South  political  liberty  could  never  be  the  lot 
of  the  masses,  and  such  measure  of  it  as  existed  was  enforced 
from  without,  or  inherited  from  other  countries. 

There  is,  however,  no  sharp  line  which  divides  the  zone  of  free- 
dom from  the  zone  of  slavery ;  they  pass  into  one  another  by 
easy  and  gradual  transitions,  and  thus  it  becomes  possible  for 
two  widely  different  extremities  to  be  held  together  as  constituent 
members  of  one  great  commonwealth. 

Not  less  important  is  the  coincidence  of  this  gradual  change 
in  temperature  with  the  line  of  the  Atlantic  sea-board.  If  it  had 
been  otherwise,  if  the  coast-line  of  America  had  run  east  and  west, 
there  would  probably  have  been  a  series  of  communities  each 
with  its  own  sea-board,  and  possessing  in  miniature  those  varied 
forms  of  industry  and  production  which  now  separate  the  different 
States  one  from  another.  Instead  of  that,  each  of  the  regions 
successively  colonized  was  marked  off  by  special  peculiarities  of 
soil  and  climate,  and  was  thus  enabled  to  develop  a  commerce  of 
its  own,  and  to  attain  a  degree  of  independence  and  distinctness 
otherwise  beyond  its  reach. 

There  is  another  peculiarity  of  Northern  America  which  can- 
not fail  to  strike  even  a  careless  observer.  The  natural  approach 
between"  t0  "  is  from  the  east.  From  the  Pacific  Ocean  North 
and  Pac?ficc  America  ^  comparatively  inaccessible.  This  peculiar- 
coasts,        ity,  indeed,  belongs  to  the  whole  continent.      Nearly 


NA  TURAL  APPRO  A  CH  FROM  EAST.  7 

all  the  navigable  rivers  of  America  flow  eastward ,  The  Atlantic 
sea-board  abounds  with  harbors,  with  islands,  with  convenient 
spots  for  the  establishment  of  commercial  factories  or  outposts  to 
serve  as  a  basis  for  future  settlements.  The  west  coast  offers  no 
such  facilities.  Moreover,  it  is  noteworthy  that  the  one  point  at 
which  the  two  coast-lines  are  within  easy  reach  of  one  another, 
the  Isthmus  of  Panama,  lends  itself  far  more  readily  as  a  path- 
way for  a  westward  than  for  an  eastward  immigration.  The 
Isthmus  is  within  easy  reach  of  the  West  India  Islands,  and  to 
settlers  using  them  as  a  basis  it  forms  a  ready  approach  to  the 
Pacific.  Immigrants  coming  from  the  west  would,  on  the  other 
hand,  have  no  better  station  than  the  arid,  barren,  and  unwhole- 
some coast  on  the  west  side  of  the  Isthmus.  Nor  should  it  be 
forgotten  that  America  is  separated  from  Eastern  Asia  by  double 
the  extent  of  sea  which  divides  it  from  the  west  coast  of  Europe. 
This  vftw  does  not  conflict  with  any  theory  as  to  early  migrations 
from  Asia  to  America.  There  is  nothing  in  the  nature  of  the 
Pacific  coast  to  make  it  impossible  that  small  bands  of  settlers, 
either  driven  by  storm  or  in  deliberate  quest  of  a  new  country, 
might  land  there,  and  might  even  in  time  become  the  founders 
of  such  empires  as  those  of  Mexico  and  Peru.  Such  a  case  is 
wholly  different  from  that  of  colonists  settling  in  a  distant  country, 
and  at  the  same  time  keeping  up  a  certain  political  connection 
with  the  home  which  they  had  left.  To  such  colonists,  the  east- 
ern coast  of  America  offers  every  facility ;  the  western  is  prac- 
tically almost  inaccessible. 

By  these  physical  conditions  America  has  been  involved  in 
that  system  of  movement  which  has  hitherto  governed  the  mi- 
America  grations  of  the  Old  World.  Ever  since  our  Aryan 
thereenerai  forefathers  quitted  the  cradle  of  their  race  in  Central 
movement   Asia,  and  went  forth  to  find  new  homes  in  Europe,  the 

of  mankind  '  .  . 

westward,  stream  of  movement  has  run  westward.  The  position 
of  America,  and  the  conformation  and  character  of  the  coast, 
have  given  it  a  share  in  this  movement ;  and  we  may  look  on 
that  westward  migration,  still  incomplete,  as  one  which  embraces 
alike  the  Old  and  the  New  Worlds. 

The  parallel  does  not  end  there.  Across  the  great  westward 
movement  of  the  Old  World  there  has  always  been  a  subordi- 
nate and  lateral  movement  from  north  to  south.  That,  too,-  may 
in  a  certain  sense  be  said  to  find  its  counterpart  in  America.  We 
have  already  seen  how  there,  as  in  the  Old  World,  the  North 


8  THE  UNITED  STATES  TERRITORY. 

seems  marked  out  by  nature  as  the  home  of  political  freedom 
Relations  anc*  vigorous  national  growth.  In  America,  indeed, 
Northern  tne  course  °f  conquest  has  never  moved  directly  south- 
end  South-  ward.     The  nearest  approach  to  such  a  movement  was 

ern  Amer-  rr 

>ca.  when  the  Northern  States  were  impelled  by  their  eco- 

nomical and  political  needs,  and  enabled  by  their  superior  re- 
sources to  force  upon  their  Southern  neighbors  a  mode  of  life 
resembling  their  own  and  different  from  that  engendered  by  the 
natural  conditions  of  the  country.  This,  however,  is  not  in  itself 
a  strong  illustration  of  the  tendency  of  political  and  territorial 
conquest  to  move  southward,  and  with  this  one  exception,  the 
impulse  which  threw  the  hordes  of  the  North  upon  the  southern 
regions  of  Europe  has  found  no  exact  parallel  in  America.  But 
the  law  has  been  at  work,  albeit  its  operation  has  been  chiefly 
negative.  Instead  of  impelling  the  inhabitants  of  the  North 
southwards,  it  has  served  to  keep  the  southern  races  within  their 
own  limits.  If  danger  ever  threatened  the  English  colonies  in 
America,  it  was  always  from  their  northern  and  western  frontiers. 
The  settlers  more  than  once  knew  the  horrors  of  invasion  at  the 
hands  of  the  French  and  their  savage  allies.  From  Spain  they 
had  so  little  to  fear  that  we  have  well-nigh  forgotten  how  formi- 
dable a  neighbor  she  once  appeared.  That  the  South  American 
colonies  of  Spain,  the  deliberate  undertakings  of  a  great  nation, 
should,  even  with  the  start  of  more  than  half  a  century,  have  been 
completely  outrun  in  the  race  of  national  greatness  by  the  de- 
scendants of  a  few  poor,  straggling,  and  uncared-for  settlers,  is  a 
phenomenon  so  familiar  to  us  that  we  have  forgotten  its  strange- 
ness. Yet  it  is  a  striking  illustration  of  those  natural  laws  which 
have  decided  the  relative  destinies  of  northern  and  southern  Eu- 
rope. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE    NATIVES.1 

The  historian  of  the  United  States  is,  happily  for  himself,  un- 
der no  obligation  to  grapple  with  the  many  disputed  and  per- 
The  name  plexing  issues  which  surround  the  origin  of  the  so-called 
Red  Indians.  For  his  purposes  it  is  enough  to  con- 
sider them  as  they  were  when  the  first  English  settlers  met  them, 
and  to  know  so  much  of  their  habits,  temper,  and  political 
organization  as  will  throw  light  on  the  relations  between  the  two 
races.  It  is  scarcely  needful  to  say  that  the  name  Indian  is  one 
of  those  deeply-rooted  memorials  of  a  learned  error  which  often 
fix  their  hold  inseparably  on  our  common  speech.  To  the  first 
navigators  of  the  Atlantic,  to  Columbus  and  his  immediate  fol- 
lowers, all  lands  beyond  Europe  were  the  Indies,  and  America 
was  but  the  extreme  eastern  boundary  of  that  mysterious  terri- 
tory which  either  included  or  coincided  with  Cathay.  This  error 
has  left  its  traces  alike  in  the  names  of  the  East  and  West  Indies, 
and  in  the  term  Indian  applied  with  modifying  epithets  alike  to 
the  inhabitants  of  the  northern  and  southern  regions  of  America. 
Clumsy  as  the  term  "  Red  Indian  "  is,  it  has  established  itself  too 
firmly  to  be  dislodged,  and  it  is  not  easy  to  supply  its  place  with 

1  The  authorities  on  whom  I  have  I  chiefly  relied  in  this  chapter  are  : 

Schoolcraft's  India?i  Tribes  of  North  A  merica.  Published  by  Authority  of  Congress, 
1847.  Colden's  History  of  the  Five  Nations,  London,  1747.  Catlin's  Letters  and  Notes  on 
the  North  American  Indians,  London,  1841.  There  is  also  some  valuable  information  to 
be  found  in  Beverley's  History  of  Virginia.  My  references  are  to  the  second  edition  pub- 
lished in  1722. 

Mr.  Schoolcraft's  work  consists  of  a  collection  of  reports  and  essays,  most  of  them  written 
by  men  who  had  acted  as  interpreters  or  agents  for  the  United  States  Government.  Some  of 
these  reports,  especially  those  by  Mr.  Philander  Prescott,  show  great  power  of  observation 
and  habits  of  minute  and  conscientious  inquiry.  Cadwallader  Colden  was  for  some  years 
Governor  of  the  Colony  of  New  York,  and  had  good  opportunities  of  studying  the  political 
and  social  usages  of  the  Iroquois.  Catlin  spent  many  years  among  the  Indians  as  a  portrait 
painter,  and  shared  in  their  pursuits  and  manner  of  life. 

9 


1Q  THE  NATIVES. 

a  comprehensive  name  for  the  mass  of  savage  tribes  between 
the  Rocky  Mountains  and  the  Atlantic.1 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  earlier  movements  of  the  Red 
Indians,  we  may  consider  them  at  the  period  when  they  first  meet 
Earlier  'in-  us  as  past  the  migratory  stage,  and  definitely  settled, 
habitants.  each  tribe  on  jte  own  territory,  subject  only  to  such 
changes  as  war  or  natural  causes  may  always  bring  about  with 
any  half-civilized  race.  Antiquarians  have  discovered  undoubted 
traces  of  earlier  inhabitants  in  at  least  a  portion  of  the  territory 
afterwards  occupied  by  the  Indians.  But  whatever  earlier  civili- 
zation may  have  existed  was  utterly  and  completely  blotted  out, 
and  has  left,  as  far  as  we  can  see,  no  mark  on  the  condition  of 
those  who  followed.  There  are  not  even  such  faint  traces  as  the 
Welsh  bondsman  has  left  on  the  speech  and  daily  life  of  his 
Teutonic  conqueror.  Nowhere  do  we  find  any  clear  proof  that 
a  servile  race  existed.  Slavery,  indeed,  is  not  unknown,  but  it 
may  be  easily  explained  as  the  occasional  consequence  of  war.2 
Usually,  however,  the  captive,  if  preserved  alive,  became  not  a 
slave  but  an  adopted  member  of  the  capturing  tribe.3 

The  influence  of  the  Indians  on  the  English  colonies  was  two- 
fold. The  settler  had  to  deal  with  them  as  neighbors,  sometimes 
influence  as  friends,  sometimes  as  possible  converts  to  the  fold 
EViish  of  Christianity,  and  he  had  also  to  deal  with  them  as 
■ettiers.  enemies.  But  it  was  in  the  latter  character  that  the 
influence  of  the  savage  was  mainly  felt.  Commerce  with  the 
Indians  was  unimportant ;  the  efforts  of  missionaries  among  them 
were  but  passing  episodes  in  the  history  of  the  colonies.  But  as 
jealous  and  watchful  enemies  the  savages  were  ever  exercising 
an  influence  on  the  social  and  political  life  of  the  colonists,  and 
even  on  the  relations  of  the  various  settlements  to  one  another 
and  to  the  mother  country.  Hence  a  certain  knowledge  of  the 
political  organization  of  the  Indian  tribes,  and  of  their  method 
of  fighting  and  capacity  for  war  is  demanded  of  us  by  the  strict 
requirements  of  our  subject. 

In  dealing  with  the  character  of  the  Red  Indian  we  are  ex- 
posed to  two  opposite  errors.  Beyond  all  doubt  the  more  dan- 
gerous of  the  two  is  the  habit  of  taking  the  Indian,  as  most  mod- 


1  For  further  remarks  on  the  name  Indian,  see  Appendix  A. 

*  Beverley  (p.  195)  speaks  of  "people  of  a  rank  inferior  to  the  commons,  a  sort  of  servants 
Called  Black  boys."  Colden  (p.  16)  says  that  there  was  no  slavery  among  the  Iroquois.— 
CC  Schoolcraft,  iv.  53. 

»  Colden  (p.  5)  :  we  shall  meet  with  several  instances  of  white  prisoners  being  naturalized. 


EFFECTS  OF  CIVILIZA  TION.  z  T 

em  observers  see  him,  for  a  fair  type  of  his  race.  Sad  as  the  ad- 
mission is,  none  can  deny  that  every  step  which  has  brought  the 
Two  views  Indian  into  closer  relations  with  the  white  man  has 
character ;  led  him  a  stage  further  on  his  downward  course  from 
neouserr°"  savage  virtue  to  a  state  in  which  the  vices  of  barbarism 
and  civilization  are  blended.  The  self-interest  and  the  self-indul- 
gence of  the  white  man  have  worked  to  a  common  end.  His  ex- 
ample would  have  been  enough  to  undermine  the  continence 
and  self-restraint  of  the  savage,  even  if  the  corrupter  had  not 
found  that  such  a  change  was  for  his  own  advantage.  The  In- 
dian has  lost  his  hereditary  virtues;  his  hereditary  vices  have 
been  quickened  and  strengthened.  His  dealings  with  the  white 
man  have  sharpened  his  spirit  of  revenge,  his  merciless  cruelty 
and  treachery  towards  foes.  Sadder  still,  he  has  learned  that  loy- 
alty to  his  friends,  fidelity  to  his  plighted  word,  all  the  boasted 
virtues  of  his  forefathers,  are  but  snares  for  his  own  destruction. 
The  process  of  corruption  has  been  inevitable  and  fearfully  rapid. 
Between  the  drunken,  incontinent,  knavish  Indian  of  the  frontier, 
and  the  followers  of  Powhatan  and  Philip,  there  is  as  little  in 
common  as  between  a  costermonger's  drudge  and  the  wild  ass 
used  to  the  wilderness  that  snuffeth  up  the  wind  at  her  pleasure. 
On  the  other  hand,  a  generous  reaction  against  the  injustice  of 
the  dominant  race,  and  a  craving  for  that  romance  which  the 
early  history  of  the  English  settlers  fails  to  supply,  have  led 
others  to  clothe  the  Indian  with  a  dignity  of  character  and  a  chiv- 
alrous nobility  of  sentiment,  inconsistent  alike  with  his  circum- 
stances and  with  all  that  is  recorded  of  him.  We  may  avoid 
both  errors  if  we  rely  on  the  evidence  of  those  who  saw  the  In- 
dian before  he  was  corrupted  by  the  neighborhood  of  the  white 
race,  and  of  those  who  in  later  times  have  followed  him  into 
regions  where  these  debasing  influences  were  still  unfelt. 

Whatever  ethnology  may  hereafter  teach  us  as  to  the  origin 
of  the  Indians,  their  common  descent,  and  the  relation  which 
The  indi-  they  bear  to  the  other  inhabitants  of  the  American 
edancTho-"  continent,  we  may  for  the  present  regard  them  as  a 
mogeneous  hom0geneous  body,  clearly  marked  off  from  their 
neighbors  both  on  the  North  and  the  South.  They  are  defi- 
nitely distinguished  from  the  squalid  inhabitants  of  the  frost- 
bound  regions  of  the  North  by  their  superiority,  both  in  polit- 
ical organization  and  mechanical  skill,  and  by  greater  attention 
to   the   comforts    and    decencies   of  life.      They  stand  equally 


I2  THE  NATIVES. 

apart  from  the  peaceful  and  effeminate  nations  of  the  Spanish 
islands  and  the  adjacent  coast.  Their  religion  shows  no  affinity 
to  the  elaborate  and  sanguinary  ritual  of  the  Mexicans,  and  they 
have  no  share  either  in  the  stupendous  material  civilization  or 
the  political  servitude  of  Peru.  The  unity  of  type,  indeed, 
which  pervades  the  whole  mass  of  Red  Indians  admits  a  wide 
amount  of  diversity  between  the  various  tribes.  But  as  in  deal- 
ing with  the  physical  character  of  the  territory,  so  here  it  will  be 
best  to  let  these  special  points  of  difference  rest,  till  we  come  to 
those  scenes  and  incidents  where  a  knowledge  of  them  becomes 
needful.  For  the  present  we  may  regard  the  Indians  as  a  single 
race  with  uniform  customs  and  one  pervading  type  of  character. 

It  is  in  his  military  character  that  the  Indian  had  most  influence 
upon  his  civilized  neighbors,  and  it  is  from  this  point  of  view,  there- 
The  Indian  f°re>  tnat  vve  nave  mainly  to  deal  with  him.  Brave,  he 
in  war.  undoubtedly  was,  but  his  strength  did  not  lie  mainly  in 
in  his  valor.  He  did  not,  like  the  Afghan,  or  the  Scotch  High- 
lander, trust  to  the  effect  of  one  headlong  rush.  On  the  con- 
trary, he  avoided  rather  than  sought  an  engagement  at  close 
quarters.  His  strength  lay  in  his  power  of  concealment,  his  mi- 
nute knowledge  of  the  forest,  his  capacity  for  making  long  and 
toilsome  marches  without  food.  Nor  was  he  wanting  in  those 
mechanical  arts  which  supplement  the  skill  of  the  warrior.  His 
bow  and  tomahawk  were  craftily  fashioned,  and  he  readily  learned 
the  use  of  firearms.  An  Iroquois  fort,  with  its  triple  palisade  of 
wood,  its  galleries,  and  its  rude  machicolations  was  a  work  of 
no  mean  skill.1 

Nor  was  the  success  of  the  Indian  in  the  field  left  to  the  mere 
chances  of  individual  temper  and  capacity.  From  his  earliest 
days  his  whole  training  was  devoted  to  perfecting  him  in  the 
kindred  arts  of  war  and  hunting.  His  toys  were  a  bow  and  ar- 
rows. His  first  success  in  the  chase,  the  capture  of  a  squirrel, 
or  a  muskrat,  was  an  event  for  rejoicing  in  the  family,  and  was 
honored  by  a  solemn  feast.2  The  training  of  the  young  for  war 
was  a  serious  public  affair.  The  Indian  boy  and  his  playmates, 
drawn  up  in  two  bands,  mimicked  under  the  eyes  of  their  el- 
ders the  incidents  of  a  real  battle.3  The  aptitude  for  organ- 
ized movement  thus  begotten  was  further  developed  by  the  games 
of  ball,  in  which  village  opposed  village,  and  by  public  dances. 

•  Parkman's  Pioneers  of  France  in  the  New  World  (Boston,  1874),  p    180 

*  Schoolcraft,  ii.  50.  3  /0   a   $6 


WANT  OF  ORGANIZATION.  13 

These  might  more  fitly  be  called  pantomimes,  in  which  the  dresses 
worn,  and  the  gestures  used,  varied  with  the  nature  of  the  occa- 
sion. In  the  scalp  dance,  in  which  a  victorious  war  party  cele- 
brated its  return,  the  performers  appeared  fully  armed  and 
painted,  and  went  through  the  motions  of  an  Indian  fight.1  In 
the  buffalo  dance,  designed  to  propitiate  the  Great  Spirit,  and  to 
bring  a  plentiful  supply  of  game,  the  dancers  wore  masks  with 
buffalo  heads,  and  performed  gestures  in  imitation  of  the  animal.2 
In  one  tribe,  the  Mandans,  the  ceremony  of  initiating  the  young 
warrior  into  public  life  was  accompanied  by  a  performance  repre- 
senting the  creation  of  the  world,  and  the  conflict  of  the  good 
and  evil  spirits,  in  a  manner  which  calls  to  mind  a  mediaeval 
mystery  play.3 

The  weak  point  of  the  Indian  in  war  lay  in  the  want,  not  of  mili- 
tary drill,  but  of  political  organization  and  control.     The  war 
Want  of      party  itself  was  often  sent  out,  not  by  the  will  or  under 
ticfn.mz        the  command  of  the  chief,  but  under  any  self-consti-   tu. 
tuted  leader  whose  repute  and  popularity  could  attach  to  him  a 
sufficient  force,  a  voluntary  comitatus  of  his  tribesmen.4     More- AN"i 
over,  the  Indian's  hatred  for  settled  industry  and  his  reckless  pc^$ 
improvidence^  rendered  him  incapable  of  a  systematic  and  sus- 
tained~efTort  in  war.      With  all  his  manual  skill  and  quick  in- 
telligence, he  utterly  despised  agriculture.     Squaws  and  hedge- 
hogs, he  said,  might  scratch  the  ground,  man  was  made  for  war 
and  the  chase.5     When  his  crop  was  reaped  it  was  often  wasted 
in  a  few  days  of  reckless  festivity.6     Hence  an  Indian  force  had 
no  supplies  on  which  it  could  depend;  and  when  warfare  cut  off 
the  tribe  from  the  forest  and  the  stream,  starvation  followed. 

In  other  ways,  too,  the  lack  of  self-control  and  of  any  stead- 
fast purpose  rendered  the  Indian's  courage  and  physical  strength 
useless.  An  Indian  tribe  was  in  some  cases  capable  of  sustained 
friendship  or  sustained  enmity.  As  we  shall  see,  the  Iroquois 
confederacy  maintained  for  more  than  a  century  a  firm  league 
with  the  English,  while  the  Wyandots  or  Hurons  were  the  allies 
of  the  French.  But  the  idea  of  policy,  of  postponing  present 
gain  or  revenge  to  some  future  good  seems  to  have  been^  wholly 
foreign  to  the  Indian.  In  Virginia  and  New  England  alike 
the  native  tribes  weakened  one  another  by  suicidal  feuds,  and 

1  Catlin,  i.  245.  2  Catlin,  i.  127. 

8  lb.  i.  157.  4  Schoolcraft,  ii.  183,  iv.  31. 

6  Report  in  Massachusetts  Historical  Society  Collection,  v.  20. 

6  Catlin,  i.  188. 


j  THE  NA  TIVES. 

thus  fell  separately  before  a  power  whose  force,  if  they  had 
been  united  among  themselves,  they  might  have  long  defied. 
As  in  war,  so  in  every  aspect  of  Indian  life  we  find  a  want  of 
positive  authority  and  well-defined  control.  Of  law,  of  a  system  of 
Positive  restraint,  administered  by  the  chiefs  and  enforced  by  a 
mwJmy.  public  police,  we  find  no  trace.1  The  council  of  the 
village  or  tribe  settled  the  few  simple  affairs  of  the  commu- 
nity, chiefly  its  wars.  It  seems  seldom,  if  ever,  to  have  been 
concerned  with  the  prevention  or  punishment  of  crime.  Nor 
was  this  want  of  a  legal  sanction  supplemented  by  a  religious 
one.  The  Indian  had  indeed  an  elaborate  system  of  ceremonial, 
and  he  had  also  a  well-defined  religious  creed,  a  belief  in  the 
existence  of  a  single  Divine  Creator  and  Ruler,  and  also  in  an 
immense  multitude  of  spiritual  beings  peopling  the  world  about 
him.2  But  it  was  a  faith  which  had  no  relation  to  morals.  There 
might  indeed  be  moments  when  the  belief  of  the  Indian  in  one 
overruling  God  asserted  itself  both  as  an  article  of  faith  and  as  a 
principle  of  conduct.  But  for  the  most  part  his  good  and  evil 
actions  were  prompted  by  motives  in  which  religion  had  no 
place.  The  Great  Spirit  may  be  the  Creator,  perhaps  ulti- 
mately the  Ruler  of  the  world,  but  the  lesser  powers  of  nature 
are  nearer  and  more  formidable.  To  win  and  propitiate  them  is 
the  main  end  of  the  Indian's  religion — an  end  to  be  obtained 
not  by  moral  actions,  but  by  ceremonial  observances.  He  must 
soothe  with  songs,  dances,  and  flattering  speeches  the  spirit  of 
the  bear  whom  his  need  has  driven  him  to  kill.3  His  wife  must 
on  a  certain  night  cast  off  her  clothes  and  make  a  complete  cir- 
cuit round  his  cornfield  to  avert  blight  and  barrenness.4  These 
and  other  such  ceremonies  are  the  duties  imposed  by  the  Indian's 
religion  so  far  as  it  concerns  itself  with  human  duties.  Yet  we 
must  not  suppose  that  an  Indian  village  was  in  a  state  of  anarchy, 
or  that  order  rested  solely  on  that  primitive  system  in  which  each 

1  Mr.  Prescott  says  on  this  subject,  "  The  chiefs  have  but  little  power.  If  an  Indian 
wishes  to  do  mischief,  the  only  way  a  chief  can  influence  him  is  to  give  him  something,  or 
pay  him  to  desist  from  his  evil  ways." — Schoolcraft,  ii.  182.  This  refers  to  the  Dacotahs. 
Major  Swan,  in  a  paper  on  the  Creeks,  written  in  1791,  says,  "  Every  individual  has  so  high 
an  opinion  of  his  own  importance  and  independency,  that  it  would  be  difficult  if  not  impos- 
sible to  impress  upon  the  community  at  large  the  necessity  of  any  social  compact  that  should 
be  binding  upon  it  longer  than  common  danger  threatened  them  with  the  loss  of  their  lands 
and  hunting  ranges." — lb.  v.  279.  For  some  further  remarks  on  the  Indian  system  of  chief- 
tainship, see  Appendix  B. 

*  The  belief  of  the  1  ndian  in  one  overruling  spirit,  and  also  in  the  personal  existence  of  the 
various  powers  of  nature,  is  established  by  a  wide  consensus  of  opinion. 

•Schoolcraft,  iii.  23a  *  lb.  v.  70. 


MORALITY  AND  RELIGION.  I5 

head  of  a  household  was  in  his  own  sphere  both  lawgiver  and 
ruler.  Even  in  modern  civilized  life  we  should  err  if  we  supposed 
that  when  the  sanctions  of  law,  religion,  and  positive  morality 
were  removed,  absolute  anarchy  would  ensue.  Much  would  still 
be  left.  Men  would  still  be  swayed  by  the  principles  of  action 
which  we  variously  describe  as  fashion,  sense  of  honor,  public 
opinion,  and  custom.  And  among  savages,  in  the  absence  of 
criminal  law  and  of  a  fixed  ethical  code  resting  on  a  religious  basis, 
the  last  two  principles  of  action  gather  to  themselves  an  impor- 
tance and  sanctity  even  greater  than  that  which  they  possess 
among  civilized  men.1  The  complexity  and  flexibility  of  civ- 
ilized life  give  more  loopholes  to  the  man  who  has  broken  the 
unwritten  law  of  the  community.  He  can  change  his  abode, 
even  his  country.  He  has  closed  one  career  against  him,  but  he 
can  enter  upon  another.  The  Indian  who  had  violated  a  recog- 
nized custom  of  the  tribe  became  an  outcast,  a  moral  leper,  for 
whom  there  was  no  escape.  It  is  not  hard  to  see  the  sort  of  char- 
acter which  such  a  system  would  engender.  Be  kind  and  faithful 
to  your  friends,  be  treacherous  and  merciless  to  your  foes,  was  the 
sum  and  substance  of  Indian  morality.  To  those  who  fell  under 
neither  category  his  attitude  was  that  of  a  kindly  and  clever,  but 
capricious  and  uncontrolled  child.  He  welcomed  the  stranger, 
and  readily  gave  with  thoughtless  liberality,  and  asked  for  gifts 
with  equally  thoughtless  acquisitiveness.  These  early  ties  of  hos- 
pitality might  under  favorable  circumstances  ripen  into  firm  and 
loyal  friendship.  On  the  other  hand,  a  single  hasty  act,  a  mere 
suspicion  might  convert  the  kindly  host  into  a  merciless  foe. 

Such  were  the  people  with  whom  the  English  settlers  had  to 
deal.  They  were  savages  undoubtedly,  yet  free  from  many  of 
Relations  to tne  more  repulsive  features  of  savage  life.  The  bar- 
Geenera?ish' Darism  °f  ^e  Indian  lay  not  in  his  incapacity  for  the 
summary.  arts  0f  civilized  life,  but  in  his  insensibility  to  their  value. 
His  skill  in  woodcraft,  the  delicate  working  and  coloring  of  his 
moccasins  and  robe,  show  powers  which,  if  rightly  employed, 
would  have  enabled  him  to  adopt  many  of  the  arts  of  civilized 
men.     His  political  system,  his  powers  of  speech,   the  fanciful 

1  Catlin  gives  a  remarkable  instance  of  the  force  of  public  opinion.  He  wished  to  paint 
the  portrait  of  an  Indian  dandy,  a  class  not  unknown  to  the  savage  world.  He  was  told  that 
such  a  proceeding  would  give  great  offense  to  the  chiefs  and  warriors  whom  he  had  painted, 
as  putting  them  on  a  level  with  one  of  a  degraded  and  effeminate  class,  and  that  if  he  per- 
sisted, all  his  previous  portraits  must  be  destroyed.  The  painter  gave  way,  and  the  disap- 
pointed sitter  acquiesced  in  the  rebuff — Catlin,  i.  113. 


l6  THE  NATIVES. 

picturesqueness  of  his  mythology,  all  show  mental  powers  of  no 
low  stamp.  But  he  was  utterly  without  that  which  lies  at  the  root 
of  all  material  civilization — forethought.  He  never  dreamed  of 
postponing  present  enjoyment  to  future  good.  His  abundance 
of  land  was  a  snare  to  him.  His  hunting-grounds  were  practi- 
cally unlimited,  and  his  occasional  seasons  of  want  were  soon 
forgotten  in  the  plenty  which  succeeded  them.  Moreover, 
among  a  number  of  small  and  equally-balanced  tribes,  there  was 
no  chance  of  material  civilization  growing  up  under  the  shadow 
of  warlike  supremacy.  The  Iroquois  do  not  really  form  any  ex- 
ception. They  were  but  a  loose  confederacy,  with  little  unity. 
None  of  its  component  tribes  ever  showed  any  tendency  to  over- 
shadow the  others,  and  to  become  the  nucleus  of  a  conquering 
state. 

The  influence  which  the  Indians  exercised  on  their  P^nglish 
neighbors  made  itself  felt  in  more  ways  than  one.  The  Indian's 
power  of  resistance  exercised  a  twofold  influence  on  the  settlers. 
It  kept  them  free,  at  least  in  their  earlier  days,  from  the  worst 
effects  of  contact  with  a  weaker  race.  The  first  English  settlers 
were  saved  from  the  vices  of  the  warlike  oppressor  and  the  slave- 
holder. Fortunately,  too,  when  those  vices  did  appear,  they 
were  not  united  in  their  worst  forms.  The  New  Englandei 
massacred  Indians  cruelly  and  treacherously,  but  with  him  negro 
slavery  never  became  a  settled  form  of  industry.  The  Southern 
slaveholder  was  for  the  most  part  on  good  terms  with  his  sav- 
age neighbors.  Indeed,  the  presence  of  the  Indians  acted  as 
some  check  on  his  dealings  with  the  negro.  He  knew  that  the 
oppressed  slave  could  find  a  refuge  with  those  who  might  at  any 
moment  send  the  firebrand  and  the  scalping-knife  among  the 
scattered  and  unguarded  plantations.  Moreover,  the  dread  of 
the  Indians  kept  back  the  English  settlers  from  that  process  of 
dispersion  to  which  the  richness  of  the  soil  and  the  abundance 
of  navigable  rivers  might  have  tempted  them.  Nor  were  they 
ever  brought  face  to  face  with  any  great  military  power,  and  com- 
pelled either  to  conquer  or  abandon  the  country.  The  conquer- 
ors of  Mexico  and  Peru  were  forced  by  necessity  into  accepting 
the  tremendous  responsibilities  involved  in  the  overthrow  of  a 
great  empire.  The  English  settlers,  far  less  fit  for  such  a  task, 
were  spared  the  trial.  War  with  the  Indians  kept  alive  a  manly 
and  vigilant  spirit,  while  it  never  imposed  on  the  conquerors  the 
duty  of  ruling  a  subject  people. 


ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  THE  SETTLERS.  I7 

I  may  seem  in  a  former  passage  to  have  spoken  harshly  of  the 
English  settlers  in  their  dealings  with  the  Indians.  To  the  latter 
those  dealings  brought  little  but  evil.  Yet  we  must  not  blame 
the  settlers  too  readily.  Between  the  savage  and  the  civilized 
man  there  must  constantly  arise  trifling  yet  fatal  causes  of  dis- 
sension. The  savage,  friendly  and  hospitable  while  he  felt  him- 
self secure,  easily  became  a  ferocious  and  revengeful  foe.  A 
single  act  of  brutality  or  perfidy  on  the  part  of  a  settler  might 
set  on  foot  a  war  of  extermination,  and  do  harm  which  years 
of  kindness  and  forbearance  could  not  undo.  Nor  are  the 
English  settlers  as  a  whole  to  be  blamed  for  those  insidious  at- 
tacks which  have  done  more  to  destroy  the  Indian  than  any 
number  of  raids  and  battles.  It  would  be  unfair  to  hold  the 
nation  accountable  for  the  sins  of  the  trader  who  debauches  the 
Indian  with  whisky  and  cheats  him  of  his  furs ;  who  at  once 
teaches  him  to  cast  away  the  savage  virtues  of  chastity  and  self-re- 
straint, and  to  assume  the  civilized  vices  of  fraud  and  lying.  The 
frontier  between  civilization  and  barbarism  must  ever  be  a  debat- 
able land  where  the  grasp  of  law  becomes  feeble.  But  this  plea, 
though  it  may  palliate  the  guilt  of  the  tragedy,  does  not  lessen 
its  sadness.  There  remains  the  fact  that  the  Indian,  savage 
though  he  was,  at  least  enjoyed  the  pleasures  and  displayed  the 
virtues  of  the  savage.  The  white  man  stripped  him  of  these, 
and  gave  him  in  exchange  no  share  of  civilization  save  its  evils.. 

2 


CHAPTER  IV. 

AMERICAN    DISCOVERY    DURING    THE    SIXTEENTH    CENTURY.1 

It  is  no  legitimate  part  of  our  subject  to  inquire  what  voyager 
from  the  Old  World  first  set  foot  on  the  shores  of  America.  Even 
Pre-coium-  if  there  be  any  truth  in  the  romance  of  Prince  Madoc, 
bian  voya-   Qr  ^  thg  fuUer  and  more  circumstantial  but  equally 

unconfirmed  story  of  the  Zeni;  if,  according  to  a  more  probable 
and  better  authenticated  tradition,  the  vikings  of  Iceland  an- 
ticipated in  the  eleventh  century  the  Massachusetts  Puritans  of 
the  seventeenth,  none  of  these  legends  bear  in  any  way  upon 
our  subject.2  If  these,  or,  as  well  may  be,  other  voyagers  of 
whom  every  trace  has  utterly  perished,  did  pass  those  bounda- 
ries which  sever  the  Old  World  from  the  New,  their  exploits  are 
not  only  forgotten,  but  have  left  no  abiding  trace  on  the  land  or 
its  people.  America  for  us  means  at  the  outset  the  America 
which  Columbus  discovered,  a  continent  absolutely  separated 
from  the  Old  World  either  by  a  vast  ocean  or  a  frozen  wilderness. 
It  may  seem  paradoxical  to  say  that  the  early  voyages  in  quest 
of  Cathay  and  the' court  of  Prester  John  have  more  to  do  with 
„    .     .      our  subject  than  the  stories,  even  if  true,  of  Vinland 

Navigation  J  7 

and  discov-  or  of  the  Zeni.     Yet  so  it  is.     The  English  colomza- 

ery  before        .  ... 

the  fifteenth  tion  of  America  is  but  one  side  of  that  movement 
which  transferred  a  large   part  of  the  world's  drama 

1  Nearly  all  the  materials  for  this  chapter  are  to  be  found  in  Hakluyt's  collection  of  voy- 
ages. The  compiler  of  that  truly  noble  collection  will  come  before  us  at  a  later  period,  when 
he  himself  took  part  in  the  colonization  of  Virginia.  Unless  otherwise  specified  my  refer- 
ences are  to  the  edition  of  1809. 

*  The  alleged  voyage  of  Nicolo  Zeno,  a  Venetian,  in  1380,  rest  on  the  evidence  of  a  man- 
uscript said  to  be  discovered  by  a  member  of  the  Zeno  family  in  1558.  This  manuscript  has 
been  edited  by  Mr.  Major  for  the  Hakluyt  Society.  The  editor  has  added  a  careful  and  la- 
borious introduction,  and  has  convinced  himself  of  the  truth  of  the  story,  a  result  attained  by 
a  somewhat  liberal  use  of  conjectural  emendations.  The  Norse  settlement  has  been  made 
the  subject  of  several  monographs,  both  in  America  and  Denmark. 

The  stories  of  the  Norse  settlement  and  Zeno's  voyage  are  clearly  set  forth  in  Bryant  and 
Gay's  History  of  the  United  States,  London,  1876. 

iS 


OPENING  6F  THE  GREA  T  ERA  OF  DISCO  VER  Y.  1 9 

from  the  Mediterranean  to  the  Atlantic.  The  various  hopes, 
whether  shadowy  or  real,  which  urged  on  the  explorers  of  the 
fifteenth  century  were  part  of  the  machinery  by  which  that  change 
was  wrought. 

The  history  of  European  navigation,  like  that  of  some  of  the 
arts,  is  not  one  of  continuous  and  uniform  progress.  The  thir- 
teenth century,  that  marvelous  birthtime  of  great  ideas,  seemed 
for  a  while  about  to  open  a  new  epoch  of  discovery.  The  travels 
of  Marco  Polo,  the  missions  of  John  de  Piano  Carpini  and  Will- 
iam de  Rubricis,  bade  fair  to  be  the  beginning  of  an  era  destined 
to  spread  the  arts  and  religion  of  Europe  into  the  uttermost  parts 
of  the  earth.  It  was  probably  well  for  mankind  that  the  discov- 
ery of  a  new  world  accompanied,  instead  of  anticipating,  the 
purification  of  Teutonic  Christianity.  The  explorers  of  the  thir- 
teenth century  had  no  immediate  followers.  The  dismember- 
ment of  the  Mongol  Empire  substituted  a  number  of  barbarous 
chieftains  for  one  comparatively  enlightened  despot,  and  excluded 
European  missionaries  and  merchants  from  Eastern  Asia.  The 
crusading  impulse  died  but,  and  the  interest  in  distant  lands 
which  it  had  begotten  died  out  with  it.  That  missionary  zeal 
which  the  birth  of  the  mendicant  orders  had  kindled  grew  weak, 
or  spent  its  strength  in  the  victories  of  the  schools.  European 
commerce  flowed  on  in  its  old  channels,  and  mercantile  enter- 
prise applied  itself  more  and'  more  to  the  development  of  home 
industry  rather  than  to  distant  exploration.  Cathay  and  the  land 
of  Prester  John  gradually  passed  from  the  domain  of  real  geogra- 
phy into  that  of  romance.  For  more  than  a  century  after  the 
return  of  Marco  Polo  in  1295  Europeans  added  little  or  nothing 
to  their  knowledge  of  distant  lands. 

The  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  century  saw  the  first  signs  of  the 
coming  change.  Englishmen  may  remember  with  something  of 
Opening  of  satisfaction  that  it  was  a. grandson  of  John  of  Gaunt, 
eraofdis-  Prmce  Henry  of  Portugal,  who  gave  the  first  impulse 
covery.  t0  the  naval  discoveries  of  that  age.  The  series  of 
Portuguese  voyages,  extending  over  seventy-four  years,  which 
gradually  revealed  to  the  world  the  whole  of  the  West  Coast  of 
Africa,  and  which  disclosed,  though  they  did  not  surmount,  the 
dangers  of  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  were  the  first  sign  that  the 
dominion  of  the  seas  was  passing  away  from  the  maritime  towns 
of  Italy  to  the  nations  of  the  Atlantic  sea-board. 

The  greatest  of  all  these  voyages  has  a  special  connection  with 


20 


AMERICAN  DISCOVERY  DURING  XVIth  CENTURY. 


our  subject.  In  14S6  Bartholomew  Columbus,  the  brother  of 
^    ,       '     the  admiral,  accompanied  Diaz  and  took  part  in  that 

knglisn  '  *  1  , 

commerce     ereat  discovery  which  unveiled  to  the  modern  world 

and  navi-       °  J  .'*.*.•  m  1    . 

gation.  the  southern  extremity  of  Africa.  1  wo  years  later, 
fortified  with  his  own  practical  experience  and  with  the  theo- 
retical wisdom  of  his  brother,  Bartholomew  came  to  lay  the 
scheme  of  the  admiral  before  the  English  court.1  On  his  way 
he  was  captured  by  pirates,  and  when  he  at  length  reached 
England  he  was  wholly  without  the  needful  means  of  obtaining 
access  to  the  king.  At  length  this  difficulty  was  surmounted. 
Henry,  if  we  may  believe  the  account  of  one  who  must  have 
known  Bartholomew.  Columbus  well,  showed  himself  wiser  than 
the  princes  of  Southern  Europe.  He  entertained  the  admiral's 
project  favorably,  aud  sent  for  him  to  his  court.  The  delay, 
however,  had  been  fatal;  and  Bartholomew  found  his  brother 
already  pledged  to  the  service  of  Spain. 

Doubtless  many  an  Englishman  of  the  next  generation  must 
have  felt  with  regret  that  but  for  a  trifling  mischance  England 
might  have  grasped  those  first  fruits  of  American  discovery  which 
Spain  reluctantly  suffered  to  be  thrust  upon  her.  But  in  truth 
it  was  no  mere  temporary  or  accidental  hindrance  which  left 
Spain  without  a  rival  in  her  career  of  conquest.  England  was 
not  yet  ripe  for  the  task  of  conquering  and  colonizing  the  New 
World.  The  English  of  that  day  were  a  thriving,  industrious 
race,  content  with  the  resources  of  a  moderately  populated  soil 
and  a  solid,  but  neither  brilliant  nor  adventurous,  commerce. 
The  fifteenth  century  had  indeed  done  something  to  prepare  the 
merchants  of  England  for  the  greater  enterprises  which  the  suc- 
ceeding age  had  in  store  for  them.  In  many  ways  the  past  age 
had  been  one  of  national  humiliation  and  distress.  Disastrous 
•campaigns  in  Normandy  and  Guienne,  the  Wars  of  the  Roses, 
and  the  tyranny  of  the  conquering  Yorkists  had  wrought  havoc 
among  the  noble  houses.  The  blood  of  the  yeomanry  flowed 
■like  water  at  Barnet  and  Towton.  But  through  all  this  the  mer- 
chant and  craftsman  had  thriven  and  waxed  strong  in  riches  and 
in  skill.  Commercial  treaties  with  the  Netherlands,  Brittany, 
Spain,  Denmark,  Genoa,  and  the  Hanse  towns  show  that  foreign 
trade  was  growing  up  on  a  scale  large  enough  to  call  out  the 

»  For  Bartholomew  Columbus's  presence  at  the  discovery  of  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  see 
Help's  Spanish  Conquest  in  America,  x.  69.  Bartholomew  Columbus's  visit  to  England  is 
mentioned  in  the  Life  of  ChristopJier  Columbus  by  his  son  Ferdinand.  The  passage  is 
quoted  in  Hakluyi,  :   22.     See  also  Bacon's  Life  of  Henry  VTI. 


STA  TE  OF  ENGLISH  COMMERCE.  2  I 

skill  and  energies  of  the  middle-classes,  and  to  alarm  those  who 
looked  with  dread  on  the  influx  of  foreign  luxuries  and  the  ex- 
portation of  English  capital.  The  galleys  of  Venice  and  Flor- 
ence brought  spiceries  and  wines — 

Apes  and  japes  and  marmosets  tayled, 
Trifles  and  nifles  that  little  have  avayled.i 

English  merchants  met  Frenchmen,  Lombards,  Genoese,  and 
Catalans  in  the  great  marts  of  the  Netherlands.  As  early  as 
1406  the  English  merchants  in  the  cities  of  the  Low  Countries 
formed  distinct  corporations,  each  under  a  governor  of  its  own 
selection.2  A  few  years  later  the  same  privileges  were  extended 
to  those  in  Scandinavia.3  In  1485  we  find  one  Ludovic  Strozzi 
appointed  agent — or,  as  we  may  call  it,  proxenos — for  the  Eng- 
lish merchants  at  Pisa,  for  which  service  he  was  to  receive  a  due 
of  one  in  four  hundred  on  all  English  goods  sold  there.4  But  the 
change  had  not  yet  begun  to  tell  on  English  seamanship.  The 
principal  voyages  made  were  those  for  the  winter  supply  of  fish 
from  Iceland.  The  Levantine  trade  had  not  yet  come  into  be- 
ing. A  statute,  indeed,  had  been  passed  in  1485,  the  precursor 
in  a  faint  degree  of  our  later  Navigation  Acts,  ordaining  that  no 
Gascon  or  Guienne  wine  should  be  imported  save  in  English, 
Welsh,  or  Irish  vessels.5  But  in  spite  of  this  restriction  English 
goods  were  for  the  most  part  carried  in  the  ships  of  Venice  and 
other  foreign  States.  In  the  words  of  an  old  writer,  "  Easterlings 
and  Lombards  fed  us  as  they  listed."  6  We  may  form  some  idea 
of  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  naval  enterprise  of  that  day  from 
a  writer  who,  to  those  of  his  own  time,  probably  seemed  an  en- 
thusiast. In  a  rhyming  pamphlet  published  about  1430,7  under 
the  head  of  "  Libellus  de  Politia  Conservative  Maris,"  the  writer 
sets  forth  the  various  motives  by  which  England  ought  .to  be 
guided  in  her  naval  and  mercantile  policy.  He  begins  by  repeat- 
ing the  advice  of  the  Emperor  Sigismund,  who  bade  Henry  V. 
guard  Calais  and  Dover  as  his  two  eyes.  He  points  out  how 
the  command  of  those  two  forts,  the  keys  of  the  Channel,  gives 

1  Libellus  de  Politia  Couserz>ativd  Maris,  Hakluyt,  i.  207. 

2  Rymer's  Fcedera,  viii.  465.  s  lb.  511.  4  lb.  xii.  271. 
6  1  Henry,  vii.  8. 

6  Nova  Britannia,  an  anonymous  pamphlet  writien  in  1609  on  behalf  of  the  Virginia  plan- 
tation, republished  in  Force's  collection,  vol.  i. 

7  The  writer  speaks  of  Sigismund,  "  the  great  Emperor  which  yet  liveth,"  and  refers  to  his 
visit  to  England.  As  that  event  took  place  in  1416  and  his  death  in  1438,  we  have  the  date 
approximately  given  us. 


22      AMERICAN  DISCOVERY  DURING  XVIth  CENTURY. 

us  a  full  control  over  the  commerce  between  Spain  and  Flanders. 
So,  too,  the  Prussians  and  the  Easterlings  (that  is  to  say,  the  na- 
tions on  the  eastern  shores  of  the  Baltic)  are  dependent  on  their 
trade  with  Flanders— a  trade  which,  as  long  as  we  keep  the  seas, 
can    only  subsist   by  our   forbearance.     To    use   our    maritime 
power  in  neighboring  waters  to  force  other  nations  to  treat  us 
with  respect  is  the  writer's  idea  of  our  naval  policy.     The  notion 
of  distant  voyages  for  exploration,  or  of  commercial  intercourse 
with  remote  nations,  never  seems  to  have  presented  itself  to  him. 
Such  maritime  skill  and  enterprise  as  England  did  then  pos- 
sess was  for  the  most  part  centred  in  the  West.      Two  centuries 
Bristol        before  the  discovery  of  America,  in  the  great  fleet  of 
wtsthe       Edward  IIL,  one  hundred  and  fifty-six  ships  out  of 
seven  hundred  came  from  the  ports  of  Exmouth,  Dartmouth, 
Plymouth,  Fowey  and  Bristol,1  and  many  entries  in  the  archives 
of  the  fourteenth  century  show  that  the  towns  of  the  west  coast 
held  a  position  rivaling  that  of  the  Cinque  ports.     But  the  city 
which  stood  out  pre-eminent,  the  Venice  or  Lubeck  of  Western 
England,  was   Bristol.     Her  natural  position,  sheltered  as    she 
was  by  the  gorge  of  the  Avon,  and  with  a  navigable  stream 
flowing  beneath  her  walls,  marked  her  out  as  a  great  naval  city. 
She  had  no  rivalry  to  fear  from  the  seaports  of  Wales  or  Lan- 
cashire, and  could  appropriate  to  herself  all  the  commerce  of 
Ireland.     As  early  as  the  twelfth  century  her  port  was  the  resort 
of  Irish  and  Norwegian  traders.     Save  London  no  English  city 
took  to  itself  so  proud  and  so  independent  a  position.     We  are 
reminded  of  the  great  cities  of  the  Netherlands  when  we  read  of 
the  burghers  assembling  at  the  sound  of  the  city  bell  to  withstand 
the  encroachments  of  the  neighboring  lord.     Indeed,  but  for  the 
causes  which  kept  municipal  freedom  within  bounds  in  England, 
and  compelled  our  great  cities  to  find  their  place  in  the  general 
economy  of  the  realm,  Bristol  might  well  have  become  a  com- 
mercial republic  by  herself.     She  was  the  ally  in  one  century  of 
Stephen,  in  the  next  of  Earl  Simon.     At  a  later  date  she  defied 
for  three  whole  years  the  forces  of  Edward  of  Carnarvon.     Ten 
years  afterwards  she  witnessed  his  final  overthrow,  and  she  saw 
the  chief  adherents  of  Richard  brought  to   the   block  by   the 
victorious  Lancastrians.     Other  events  connected  her  with  the 
history  of  the  realm  in  a  less  sombre  fashion.     In  1253  she  wit- 
nessed a  royal  marriage,  and  the  next  century  her  tolls  were  im- 

1  Hakluyt,  i,  131. 


THE  CABOTS'  FIRS T  PA, TENT.  2 , 

portant  enough  to  form  a  royal  dower.  Despite  the  changes  and 
disfigurements  of  later  ages,  we-  can  still  easily  picture  to  our- 
selves what  the  first  American  voyagers  looked  on  as  they  sailed 
from  the  wharves  of  Bristol.  'A  costly  and  toilsome  process  had 
turned  the  Frome,  and  converted  its  swampy  bed  into  a  solid 
quay.  The  city  itself  had  absorbed  the  neighboring  hamlets,  and 
with  them  had  taken  to  herself  that  noble  church  which  forms 
her  chief  architectural  boast.  The  tall  towers  of  the  Temple 
Church  and  of  St.  Stephen's  soared  above  the  wharves  and 
warehouses,  and  fitly  marked  out  by  their  local  peculiarities  the 
capital  of  Western  England.  No  stronghold  either  of  lord  or 
bishop  looked  down  from  the  height  above.  The  castle,  indeed, 
still  stood,  but  shorn  of  its  strength,  a  stately  memorial  of  a  de- 
parted past.  Its  very  position,  encircled  by  the  dwellings  of  the 
citizens  and  commanded  by  the  heights  above,  showed  that  the 
proud  city  had  needed  no  protection,  and  had  owned  no  lord.1 

A  city  so  endowed  by  nature  and  by  human  skill,  and  so  rich 
in  historical  associations,  might  well  seem  marked  out  to  lead  the 
The  Cabots*  way  in  the  task  of  American  navigation.  For  the  first 
first  patent,  steps  she  was  indebted  to  foreign  help.  As  early  as 
the  reign  of  Edward  III.,  sailors  from  Genoa  and  other  foreign 
ports  had  served  in  the  English  navy.  The  increasing  confu- 
sions of  Italy  after  the  French  invasion  naturally  tempted  her 
seamen  to  transfer  their  skill  to  the  rising  powers  of  Western 
Europe.  Among  such  emigrants  was  John  Cabot,  a  Venetian, 
who  settled  in  Bristol,  and  then,  after  a  return  to  his  own  coun- 
try, again  revisited  his  adopted  city.  Of  his  earlier  history  and 
personal  character,  we  know  nothing.  Our  own  records  furnish 
nothing  but  the  scanty  outlines  of  his  career,  and  the  one  glimpse 
of  light  which  is  thrown  upon  the  living  man  is  due  to  a  lately 
discovered  letter  from  his  countryman,  the  Venetian  ambassador. 
Of  his  son  Sebastian,  we  know  more.  He  was  born  in  Bristol, 
returned  with  his  parents  to  Venice  when  three  years  old,  and 
revisited  England  as  a  boy  or  very  young  man.  His  features, 
marked  with  the  lines  of  thought  and  hardship,  still  live  on  the 
canvas  of  Holbein ;  and  one  at  least  of  the  naval  chroniclers  of 
the  day  writes  of  him  in  the  language  of  warm  personal  affec- 
tion.    In  1496  a  patent  was  granted  to  John  Cabot  and  his  sons 

1  I  have   taken    most  of  the  above   particulars  from  Mr.  Seyer's  Memoirs   of  Bristol,  a 
work  of  much  learning  and  considerable  literary  power,  published  in  1821. 

2  The  authorities   for   the  .history   and  voyages  of  the  Cabots,  and  a  discussion  of  certain 
disputed  questions,  will  be  found  in  Appendix  C. 


24     AMERICAN  DISCOVERY  DURING  Willi  CENTURY. 

Le»vis,  Sebastian,  and  Sancius.  This  patent  is  interesting  as 
the  earliest  surviving  document  which  connects  England  with 
the  New  World.  It  gave  the  patentees  full  authority  to  sail  with 
five  ships  under  the  royal  ensign,  and  to  set  up  the  royal  banner 
on  any  newly-found  land,  as  the  vassals  and  lieutenants  of  the 
king.  They  were  bound  on  their  return  to  sail  to  Bristol  and  to 
pay  a  royalty  of  one-fifth  upon  all  clear  gain.  The  direction  •  of 
the  voyage,  the  cargo  and  size  of  the  ships,  and  the  mode  of 
dealing  with  the  natives,  are  all  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  com- 
mander. 

Of  the  details  of  the  voyage  itself,  so  full  of  interest  for  every 
Englishman,  we  have  but  the  scantiest  knowledge.  In  this  re- 
The  first  spect  the  fame  of  Sebastian  Cabot  has  fared  far  worse 
voyage.  than  triat  0f  the  great  discoverer  with  whom  alone  he 
may  be  compared.  We  can-  trace  Columbus  through  every  stage 
of  his  enterprise.  We  seem  to  stand  by  the  side  of  the  great  ad- 
miral in  his  difficulties,  his  fears,  his  hopes,  his  victory.  We  can 
almost  fancy  that  we  are  sharing  in  his  triumph  when  at  last  he 
sails  on  that  mission  whose  end  he  saw  but  in  a  glass  darkly,  vic- 
torious over  the  intrigues  of  courtiers,  the  avarice  of  princes,  and 
the  blindness  of  mere  worldly  wisdom.  Our  hearts  once  more 
sink  as  the  cowardice  of  his  followers  threatens  to  undo  all ;  the 
prize  that  had  seemed  won  is  again  in  danger.  We  feel  all  the  in- 
tensity of  suspense  as  night  after  night  land  is  promised  and  the 
morning  brings  it  not.  When  at  length  the  goal  is  reached,  we 
can  almost  trick  ourselves  with  the  belief  that  we  have  a  part  in 
that  glory,  and  are  of  that  generation  by  whom  and  for  whom 
that  mighty  work  was  wrought.  No  such  halo  of  romantic  splen- 
dor surrounds  the  first  voyage  of  Sebastian  Cabot.  A  meagre 
extract  from  an  old  Bristol  record  :  "  In  the  year  1497,  June 
24,  on  St.  John's  Day,  was  Newfoundland  found  by  Bristol  men, 
in  the  ship  called  the  '  Matthew  '  " — a  few  dry  statements  such 
as  might  be  found  in  the  note-book  of  any  intelligent  sea-captain 
—these  are  all  the  traces  of  the  first  English  voyage  which  reached 
the  New  World.  We  read  in  an  account,  probably  published 
under  the  eye  of  Cabot  himself,  that  on  June  24,  at  five  o'clock 
in  the  morning,  he  discovered  that  land  which  no  man  before 
that  time  had  attempted,  and  named  it  Prima  Vista.  An  adja- 
cent island  was  called  St.  John,  in  commemoration  of  the  day. 
A  few  statements  about  the  habits  of  the  natives  and  the  char- 
acter of  the 'soil,  and  the  fisheries,  make  up  the  whole  story. 


CABOT'S  SECOND   VOYAGE.  25 

We  may  perhaps  infer  that  Cabot  meant  this- as  a  report  on  the 
fitness  of  the  place  for  trade  and  fishing,  knowing  that  these  were 
the  points  which  would  excite  most  interest  in  England.  One 
entry  from  the  privy  purse  expenses  of  Henry  VII.,  "  10/.  to  hym 
that  found  the  new  isle,"  is  the  only  other  record  that  remains 
to  us.  Columbus  was  received  in  solemn  state  by  the  sovereigns 
of  Aragon  and  Castile,  and  was  welcomed  by  a  crowd  greater 
than  the  streets  of  Barcelona  could  hold.  Cabot  was  paid  ten 
pounds.  The  dramatic  splendor  of  the  one  reception,  the  pro- 
saic, mercantile  character  of  the  other,  represent  the  different 
tempers  in  which  Spain  and  England  approached  the  task  ot 
American  discovery. 

But  though  our  own  annals  give  us  so  scanty  an  account  of 
the  reception  of  the  two  Cabots,  the  want  is  to  some  extent  sup- 
plied from  a  foreign  source.  Letters  are  extant  from  the  Vene- 
tian ambassador,  in  which  he  describes  with  just  pride  the 
enthusiasm  with  which  his  countryman  was  received  by  the  peo- 
ple when  he  walked  along  the  streets. 

The  next  year  saw  Cabot  again  sailing  with  a  fresh  patent. 
Several  points  in  it  are  worthy  of  notice.  John  Cabot  is  alone 
Second  mentioned  by  name.  From  this  it  might  be,  and, 
patent.  indeed,  has  been  inferred  that  the  part  played  by 
Sebastian  Cabot  in  the  first  voyage  was  merely  secondary,  and 
that  John  was  the  principal  conductor  of  the  first  voyage,  as 
he  was  by  the  patent  designated  to  be  of  the  second.  He  is 
authorized  in  person  or  by  deputy  to  take  six  English  ships  of 
not  more  than  two  hundred  tons  burden  each,  and  to  lead  them 
to  the  land  which  he  had  lately  discovered.  There  is  no  limita- 
tion, either  of  departure  or  return  to  Bristol,  and  no  mention  is 
made  of  royalties.  Probably  the  original  provisions  were  still 
regarded  as  binding,  except  so  far  as  rescinded  or  modified  by  the 
second  patent. 

In  1498  Sebastian  Cabot  sailed  from  Bristol  with  one  vessel 
manned  and  victualed  at  the  king's  expense,  accompanied  by 
Sebastian  tnree  ships  of  London  and  probably  some  of  Bristol 
second*  itself.  His  cargo  consisted  of  "  grosse  and  Sleighte 
voyage.  wares,"  for  trafficking  with  the  natives.1  So  scanty  are 
the  records  of  Cabot's  two  expeditions,  that,  although  we  have 
the  geographical  extent  of  his  discoveries,  yet  it  is  impossible  to 

1  Bacon's  Life  of  Henry  VII.,  published  in  Messrs.  Ellis  and  Spedding's  edition  of  Bacon's 
works,  vi.  p.  179,  London,  1857. 


€c^E     UBRa 


26     AMERICAN  DISCOVERY  DURING  XVIth  CENTURY. 

assign  to  each  voyage  its  proper  share.  We  know  that  in  one  or 
other  of  them  he  reached  sixty-seven  and  a  half  degrees  of  north 
latitude  and  persuaded  himself  that  he  had  found  the  passage  to 
Cathay.  The  fears,  however,  of  his  sailors,  justified,  perhaps,  by 
the  dangers  of  the  north  seas,  withheld  him  from  following  up  the 
the  enterprise.  He  then  turned  southward  and  coasted  till  he 
came  into  the  latitude  of  thirty-eight.  Of  the  result  of  the  second 
voyage,  and  of  Sebastian  Cabot's  reception  in  England,  we  hear 
nothing.  He  disappears  for  a  while  from  English  history,  carry- 
ing with  him  the  unfulfilled  hope  of  a  Northwest  passage,  destined 
to  revive  at  a  later  day,  and  then  to  give  birth  to  some  of  the  most 
daring  exploits  that  have  ever  ennobled  the  names  of  Englishmen. 
There  may  have  been  various  causes  beside  lack  of  enterprise 
to  withhold  Henry  VII.  and  his  subjects  from  adventures  and 
Patents  of  discoveries  in  the  direction  of  America.  The  bull  of 
iy>1,  Alexander  VI.  could  not  fail  to  have  some  effect  with 

a  nation  which  had  not  yet  cast  off  its  allegiance  to  the  Papacy, 
and  the  importance  of  the  Spanish  alliance  may  have  made  the 
king  chary  of  encroaching  on  the  treasures  of  the  New  World. 
Still,  he  did  not  altogether  neglect  American  discoveries.  In  the 
next  seven  or  eight  years  we  find  scattered  intimations  that  voy- 
ages were  made,  though  of  their  circumstances  we  know  noth- 
ing. We  find  a  patent  granted  to  three  Englishmen,  Thomas 
Ashurst,  Richard  Warde,  and  John  Thomas,  and  three  Portu- 
guese, John  Gonsalo  and  John  and  Francis  Fernando,  bearing 
date  March,  1501.  The  social  position  of  the  patentees  may  be 
in  some  measure  inferred  from  the  fact  that  we  find  John  Fer- 
nando twelve  years  later  in  the  English  navy  commanding  a 
ship  with  a  crew  of  a  hundred  men  against  France.1  Eliot,  who 
appears  as  one  of  the  patentees  in  a  like  document  a  little  later 
is  mentioned  twice  in  the  State  Papers  as  belonging  to  the  retinue 
of  the  deputy  of  Calais.2  In  the  first  entry  he  is  called  a  draper ; 
in  the  second  a  merchant  or  draper.  The  explorers  of  that  day 
seem  to  have  been  substantial  merchants  or  shipmasters ;  not, 
like  Gilbert  or  Raleigh,  or  the  other  voyagers  of  seventy  years 
later,  members  of  the  landed  aristocracy,  nor  needy  advent- 
urers like  Pizarro  and  Cortez.  The  patent  of  1501  is  much 
more  ample  than  either  of  those  granted  to  John  Cabot.3     Full 

1  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Henry  VIII.,  edited  by  Mr.  Brewer,  i.  4535. 
*lb.  3919,  53S8. 

»  The  patent  was  discovered  by    Mr.  Kiddle  among  the  Archives,  and  is  published  in  an 
appendix  to  his  Memoirs  of  Sebastian  Cabot. 


VOYAGES  ABOUT  ,joo.  27 

power  is  given  to  the  patentees  to  explore  and  appropriate  all 
•districts  not  yet  discovered  by  Christians.  No  limitation  is 
placed  on  the  number  or  tonnage  of  their  vessels.  All  English 
subjects  are  to  have  full  right  of  settlement  in  the  lands  to  be 
discovered.  The  patentees  are  allowed,  if  necessary,  to  defend 
their  territory  from  encroachment  by  arms.  The  office  of  admiral, 
with  the  full  powers  appertaining  to  it,  is  vested  in  them.  The 
three  Portuguese  and  their  descendants  are  admitted  to  the  rights 
of  subjects,  with  the  important  reservation  that  they  are  still  to 
pay  alien  duties.  The  patentees  are  empowered  to  punish 
offenders,  and  special  mention  is  made  of  any  attacks  on  the 
virtue  of  the  native  women.  Indeed,  the  whole  character  of  the 
patent  seems  to  speak  of  a  time  in  which  the  dangers  of  inter- 
course with  barbarous  countries  were  to  some  extent  understood. 
A  monopoly  of  trade  for  ten  years  is  secured  to  the  patentees, 
and  in  consideration  of  the  expense  of  the  adventure,  they  are  at 
liberty  to  import  one  ship's  cargo  of  goods  duty  free  for  four 
years.  All  infringement  of  the  monopoly  was  to  be  punished  by 
a  forfeiture  of  goods,  one-half  to  go  to  the  Crown  and  one-half 
to  the  patentees.  The  tariff  for  carriage  of  goods  is  fixed.  Eng- 
lish merchants  were  allowed  to  carry  imports  to  England,  paying, 
besides  the  ordinary  customs,  one-twentieth  to  the  patentees. 
To  enforce  this  the  patentees  were  to  have  representatives  to  in- 
spect the  unloading  of  such  ships.  The  permission  to  carry 
goods  at  all  was  restricted  to  the  subjects  of  the  English  Crown, 
and  any  aliens  attempting  even  to  land  in  the  newly-discovered 
territory,  without  leave  of  the  patentees,  might  be  expelled,  or 
detained  and  punished  by  the  patentees  at  their  discretion.  It 
is  worthy  of  notice  that  in  the  original  draft  of  the  patent  a  spe- 
cial provision  is  inserted  guarding  against  any  claim  which  might 
be  advanced  by  foreigners  on  the  strength  of  concessions  made 
by  the  king  under  the  grand  seal.  This  clause,  inserted  in  the 
original  draft  of  the  patent,  was  struck  out  before  it  was  finally 
granted.  It  is  not  unlikely  that  this  provision  may  refer  to  Ca- 
bot, and  that  a  dispute  arising  out  of  his  claims  may  have  been 
the   cause  of  his  sudden  disappearance. 

In  the  December  of  the  same  year  we  find  another  patent,  in 
favor  of  Hugh  Eliot  and  Thomas  Ashurst,  merchants  of  Bristol, 
and  John  Gonsalo  and  Francis  Fernando,  esquires.1     This  patent 

1  The  patent  is  given  in  Rymer,  xiii,  37. 


28     AMERICAN  DISCOVERY  DURING  XVIlh  CENTURY. 

differs  from  the  first  in  various  points,  some  of  considerable  im- 
portance.    A  provision  is  inserted  that  no  previous  grant  which 

Second  na(*  not  yet  been  acted  uP°n  should  ^  allows  to  m" 
Patent.  terfere  with  the  proceedings  of  the  present  patentees, 
and  a  special  clause  is  added  revoking  the  patent  of  the  previous 
year.  The  provision  which  limits  the  discovery  of  lands  yet  un- 
discovered is  omitted,  but  a  special  reservation  is  inserted  in  favor 
of  the  King  of  Portugal.  The  monopoly  of  trade  is  extended 
from  ten  to  forty  years,  and  the  patentees  are  allowed  to  import 
in  one  vessel,  duty  free  for  fifteen  years,  and  in  one  vessel  of  one 
hundred  and  twenty  tons,  duty  free  for  five  years.  The  for- 
eigners are  by  this  patent  placed  on  exacdy  the  same  footing  as 
the  English  subjects,  without  any  of  the  commercial  restraints 
imposed  by  the  earlier  instrument  Altogether,  it  does  not  seem 
rash  to  infer  that  the  provisions  of  the  first  patent  had  been  found 
too  irksome,  and  that  more  favorable  terms  were  granted,  with  the 
hope  of  tempting  the  patentees  into  a  voyage. 

That  a  voyage,  if.  not  voyages,  was  made  about  this  time  can- 
not be  doubted.  We  read  in  a  letter  from  Robert  Thome,  a 
Voyages  London  merchant,  written  in  1527,  that  his  father 
about  1500.  an(j  jjugh  Eliot  "  discovered  the  Newfoundland,  and 
that  had  they  followed  their  pilot's  mind,  the  lands  of  the  West 
Indies  had  been  ours."1  Traces  of  such  voyages  are  to  be 
found  in  the  records  of  the  time  which  still  exist.  We  read  in 
the  king's  privy  purse  accounts  such  entries  as  these  : — 

17th  November,  1503.  To  one  that  brought  hawkes  from  the  Newfound- 
land isle,  1/. 

8th  April,  1504.     To  a  preste  that  goeth  to  the  islande,  2/. 

25th  August,  1505.  To  Clay's  going  to  Richmond  with  wyld  catts  and 
popyngays  of  the  new  found  island,  for  his  costs  13*.  4//. 

To  Portugales  that  brought  popyngais  and  catts  of  the  mountayne,  with 
the  stuff,  to  the  king's  grace,  5/.' 

Savages,  we  are  told,  were  seen  in  London  in  1502;  probably 
brought  over  in  one  of  these  voyages.3 

1  Hakluyt,  i,  243.     This  may  possibly  refer  to  Cabot's  voyage. 

»  Extract  from  the  Privy  Purse  Expenses  of  Henry  VII.,  made  by  Mr.  Biddle,  p.  234. 

*  "  This  yeere  (1302)  were  brought  into  the  long,  taken  in  ye  Newfoundland  by  Sebastian 
Gabon  before  named  m  anno  1498.  These  men  were  clothed  in  beasts'  skins,  and  eare  raw  flesh, 
but  spake  such  a  language  as  no  man  could  understand,  of  the  which  three  men,  two  of 
them  were  seen  in  the  king's  court  at  Westminster  two  yeeres  after.  They  were  clothed 
like  Englishmen,  and  could  not  be  discerned  from  Englishmen.**— Stow's  Chronicle,  edited 
by  Howe,  1631,  p.  483.  It  is  improbable  that  if  these  men  had  been  brought  over  by  Cabot 
in  1408  as  Stow  supposes,  and  still  retained  their  nature,  customs,  and  Lmguage  four  years 
lata,  two  ycai»  could  afterwards  have  made  so  great  a  change  ui  iScai. 


INTERVAL  OF  INACTION. 

r  the  accession  of  Henry  VIII.  we  hear  of  no  more  voy- 
ages till  the  ninth  year  of  his  reign.  The  voyages  to  the  I 
interval  of  World  apparently  offered  no  greater  results  than  hawks 
inatf  ion.  an(j  u  popyngays,"  and  Spain  might  well  seem  so  firmly 
established  as  to  defy  invading.  Before  the  end  of  the  fifteenth 
century  Hispaniola  contained  at  least  eight  Spanish  settlements. 
Ten  years  later  the  natives  of  that  island  had  begun  to  die  out 
before  the  invaders,  and  the  new-found  paradise  of  the  West 
seemed  to  be  Spanish  soil  almost  as  truly  as  Granada.  While 
English  sailors  were  jeopardizing  their  lives  on  the  dreary  coast  of 
Labrador,  and  bringing  home  strange  birds  and  savage  men  to 
amuse  the  citizens  of  London,  Vasco  Nunez  was  gazing  from 
Darien  on  these  southern  seas  which  in  a  few  years  were  to  bear 
his  countrymen  to  the  scenes  of  their  most  dazzling  triumphs  and 
their  direst  crimes.  Probably,  too,  the  energies  of  the  young 
king  were  employed  in  forming  a  war  navy  rather  than  in  projects 
of  distant  exploration.  It  is  worth  noticing  that  once  only  in  the 
first  eight  years  of  Henry  VIII.'s  reign  does  Cabot's  name  meet 
us.  In  1 5 12  we  find  him  employed  in  drawing  up  a  chart  of  the 
coast  of  Gascony  and  Guienne.1  Five  years  later  we  find  him 
again  in  command  of  an  English  expedition.  Of  the  number  of 
ships  sent  out,  and  of  the  object  and  details  of  the  voyage,  we 
know  nothing.  One  thing  only  is  clearly  recorded,  that  the  voy- 
age failed,  and  that  the  faint  heart  of  Sir  Thomas  Pert,  who  was 
associated  with  Cabot  in  the  command,  was  to  blame  for  the 
failure.2 

A  few  years  later  we  find  various  signs  that  English  seaman- 
ship was  entering  upon  a  new  era.  Two  letters  written  by  Robert 
Thome's  Thorne,  one  to  the  king,  the  other  to  Dr.  Lee,  the 
writings.  rQyal  chaplain  and  almoner,  are  of  great  interest  as 
illustrating  the  new  ideas  which  were  already  fermenting  beneath 
the  surface,  and  which  were  soon  to  be  adopted  and  carried  out 
by  the  English  nation.3  They  are  the  first  writings  which  show 
that  England  was  really  beginning  to  take  a  part  in  the  great 
naval  movement  of  the  age.  They  breathe  of  a  time  when  navi- 
gation was  passing  into  a  new  phase,  when  it  was  no  longer  a 

1  State  Papers,  Henry  VIII. ,  ii.  1456. 

1  Richard  Eden  (of  whom  more  hereafter),  in  the  dedication  of  a  book  published  in  1553, 
says  that  Henry  VIII.,  about  the  eighth  year  of  his  reign,  furnished  and  sent  forth  certain 
ships,  under  th«  governance  of  Sebastian  Cabot,  and  one  Sir  Thomas  Pert,  whose  faint 
heart  was  the  cause  that  that  voyage  took  none  effect  * 

3  Both  letters  are  published  in  the  first  volume  of  Hakluyt. 


,0      AMERICAN  DISCOVERY  DURING  XVIth  CENTURY. 

mere  handmaid  to  trade,  but  a  profession  opening  a  career  to  the 
most  ambitious,  and  calling  out  the  highest  powers  of  the  sage 
and  the  hero.  Looked  at  as  illustrations  of  the  age,  these  writings 
are  worth  our  consideration.  The  writer  had,  as  we  have  seen, 
a  hereditary  interest  in  the  question  of  American  discovery.  He 
evidently  foresaw  the  great  maritime  struggle  between  Spain  and 
England,  and  knew  how  much  we  might  learn  from  rtir  rival. 
He  had  lately  invested,  jointly  with  his  partner,  fourteen  hundred 
ducats  in  a  Spanish  adventure  to  America,  chiefly  for  the  purpose 
of  sending  two  Englishmen  on  the  voyage  to  gain  information. 
The  goal  to  be  aimed  at,  in  Thome's  opinion,  was  the  Western 
Sea,  not  yet  known  as  the  Pacific  Ocean.  The  difficulties  of  the 
Northwest  passage  are  got  over  by  a  process  of  reasoning  some- 
what characteristic  of  the  age.  "As  all  judge,  '  nihil  fit  vacuum 
in  rerum  ?iatural  so  I  judge  that  there  is  no  land  uninhabitable  or 
sea  unnavigable. "  English  sailors  thirty  years  later  could  tell 
him  a  different  tale,  yet  his  words  foreshadow  of  the  temper  in 
which  England  entered  upon  her  career  of  discovery  in  the 
northern  seas.  When  the  Northwest  passage  had  been  achieved, 
the  Western  Coast  of  America  and  the  Spice  Islands  would  be 
both  at  our  command. 

In  the  very  year  in  which  Thorne  wrote,  an  attempt  was  made 
in  the  direction  ^hich  he  indicated.  A  rich  canon  of  St.  Paul's, 
voyage  one  Al&ert  de  Prado,  fitted  out,  and  himself  took  part, 
of  1527.  in  a  voyage  to  seek  out  the  land  of  the  great  Cham.1 
Meagre  as  are  the  records,  and  barren  as  were  the  results  of  this 
expedition,  it  still  has  no  small  interest  for  us.  It  is  the  first  of 
that  long  series  of  voyages  in  which  we  are  brought  face  to  face 
with  the  actors,  and  in  which  we  can  read  their  exploits  almost 
in  their  own  words.  We  are  no  longer  confined  to  the  slender 
outline  which  is  all  that  our  earlier  records  of  English  voyages 
have  vouchsafed  to  us.  The  two  ships,  the  Mary  of  Guildford 
and  the  Sampson,  sailed  from  Plymouth  on  the  16th  of  June. 
About  three  weeks  after  their  departure  they  met  with  a  heavy 
storm,  and  the  Sampson  disappeared.  Two  days  later  the  crew 
of  the  remaining  vessel  found  themselves  among  icebergs  in  fifty- 

1  Our  knowledge  of  this  voyage  is  chiefly  derived  from  a  letter  in  Purchas's  Pilgritns  (iii. 
p.  809)  written  by  Rut,  the  master  of  one  of  the  vessels,  the  Mary  of  Guildford,  from  New- 
foundland. The  voyage  is  also  mentioned  by  Hakluyt  (iii.  167).  He  erroneously  calls  one 
of  the  ships  the  Dominus  Vobiscum.  Mr.  Biddle  (pp.  272-282)  has  ingeniously  connected 
this  with  a  voyage  mentioned  by  Herrera.  He  has  also  shown  that  it  is  very  probable  that 
Verrazani,  the  Italian  navigator,  went  on  this  voyage  and  was  murdered  by  the  savages. 


3i 

three  degrees  of  north  latitude.  They  then  turned  southward, 
and  on  the  3d  of  August  entered  the  harbor  of  St.  John.  There 
they  found  fourteen  ships,  twelve  from  France,  and  two  from 
Portugal.  By  one  of  these  Rut,  the  master,  sent  home  a  letter  in 
"bad  English  and  worse  writing,"  addressed  to  the  king.  At  the 
same  time  Albert  de  Prado  wrote  home  to  Wolsey.  The  Mary 
then  pursued  her  course  south,  and  after  exploring  the  coast  at 
various  points,  returned  to  England  in  October.  Of  her  missing 
consort,  the  Sampson,  we  hear  no  more. 

For  the  riext  nine  years  we  find  no  trace  of  any  American 
voyages.  In  1536  another  attempt  was  made.  We  now  feel 
Hore-s  that  we  are  entering  on  the  age  when  American  voy- 
voyage.i  ages  were  to  tne  gentrv  0f  England  what  the  Crusades 
had  been  to  their  forefathers.  Hore,  the  leader  of  the  expedi- 
tion, was  a  Londoner,  a  man  of  goodly  stature  and  great  cour- 
age, and  a  skillful  cosmographer.  The  king  favored  his  enter- 
prise ;  landed  squires  and  students  from  the  Inns  of  Court 
enlisted,  and  out  of  the  crews  of  the  two  ships  thirty  were  gentle- 
men by  birth  and  training.  After  mustering  at  Gravesend  and 
taking  the  sacrament,  they  set  sail  at  the  end  of  April.  The 
horrors  of  that  ill-fated  voyage  are  well-known  to  all  who  have 
studied  the  naval  records  of  that  age.  No  highly- wrought  pict- 
ure of  suffering  can  equal  in  its  effect  the  simple,  unstudied  tale 
of  their  misery.  They  touched  at  Cape  Breton,  then  sailed 
northwest,  and  landed  on  the  coast  of  Newfoundland.  Then 
their  sufferings  began.  They  were  soon  driven  to  live  on  roots 
and  berries,  and  such  fish  as  they  took  from  the  nest  of  an  osprey. 
Worse  was  in  store  for  them.  Man  after  man  disappeared,  and 
none  knew  what  became  of  them.  At  length  it  was  found  that 
famine  had  lowered  an  Englishman  to  the  level  of  the  very  sav- 
ages. Their  leader  called  them  together  and  addressed  them, 
dwelling  on  the  heiniousness  of  such  guilt,  bidding  them  to  trust 
in  the  power  of  God  which  had  so  often  given  help  in  the  time 
of  distress,  and  finally  exhorting  them  rather  to  die  manfully  than 
to  save  themselves  by  such  sinful  means.  His  trust  was  not  mis- 
placed. Just,  as  it  seemed,  in  the  very  moment  of  despair  when 
all  had  at  length  been  driven  by  hunger  to  consent  to  that 
shameful  relief  which  had  hitherto  been  only  the  sin  of  one,  a 
French  vessel  appeared,  well  furnished  with  provisions.     There  is 

1  A  full  account  of  Hore's  voyage  is  given  in  Hakluyt,  iii.  p.  168.  He  obtained  his  informa- 
tion from  one  of  the  voyagers,  Thomas  Buts,  son  of  Sir  William  Buts,  of  Norfolk. 


.  i      A  M ERIC  AN  DISCO  VERY  D  URING  XVIth  CENTUR 1 '. 

a  strange  transition  from  the  tragic  to  the  comic  as  we  read  the 
quaintly  worded  and  somewhat  euphemistic  statement  that  "such 
was  the  policy  of  the  English  that  they  became  masters  of  the 
same,  and  changing  ships  and  victualing  them  they  set  sail  to 
come  to  England."  By  the  end  of  October  they  reached  the 
coast  of  Cornwall.  One  touch  of  individual  history  gives  dra- 
matic completeness  to  the  tale.  The  voyager  by  whom  the  story 
as  we  now  read  it  was  told,  was  so  changed  with  hunger  and 
misery  that  his  father  and  mother  did  not  know  him  till  they 
found  a  secret  mark.  Such  was  the  tale  of  the  voyage,  told  to 
Richard  Hakluyt  by  the  last  survivor.  During  the  life  of  that 
survivor  a  generation  had  grown  up  to  whom  such  adventures 
were  episodes  almost  of  every-day  life.  The  dangers  of  the 
northern  seas  had  but  excited  our  countrymen  to  defy  them,  and 
sufferings  like  those  of  Hore  and  his  supporters  had  become 
familiar  events  in  the  lives  of  Englishmen. 

It  will  be  well  to  pause  before  entering  on  a  more  brilliant  and 
more  stirring  era,  to  consider  what  progress  England  had  made  in 
Progress  of the  fiTSt  na^  of  tne  century  towards  the  great  task  of  col- 
navigation.  onizing  America.  Of  outward  result  there  was  but  little. 
In  that  as  in  so  much  else  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.  was  a  period 
of  preparation  rather  than  action,  of  seed-time  rather  than  har- 
vest. During  that  time  the  English  navy  and  English  seamanship 
came  into  being.  In  justice  to  one  with  whom  there  is  but  little 
temptation  to  deal  favorably,  we  must  remember  that  this  change 
is  mainly  due  to  Henry  himself.  We  may  be  forgiven  if  for  a 
moment  we  close  our  eyes  to  the  other  and  darker  side  of  his 
character;  if  we  forget  for  a  moment  the  tyranny  of  his  rule,  the 
foul  tragedies  of  his  home,  the  reckless  and  wasteful  plunder  of 
the  Church,  the  murder  of  the  righteous  men  who  withstood  his 
will,  and  of  the  evil  councilor  who  served  him  but  too  well,  and 
only  remember  that  but  for  him  one  of  the  brightest  and  noblest 
chapters  in  English  history  might  have  been  a  blank.  But  for 
Henry  England  would  never  have  had  that  fleet  which  saved  her 
from  bondage  of  body  and  soul,  from  the  temporal  tyranny  of 
Spain,  from  the  spiritual  tyranny  of  Rome.  Under  Henry  Eng- 
land no  longer  depended  on  fishing  boats  and  privateers  for  her 
navy.  Ships  rivaling  the  largest  that  ever  sailed  from  the  ports 
of  Italy  or  Spain  were  built  in  English  docks.  The  Regent,  the 
Grace  de  Dieu,  and  the  Man  Rose  were  the  visible  nrst°fruits  of 
the  new  system.     But  the  king  saw  that  it  was  not  enough  to 


NAVIGATION  UNDER  HENRY  VIII.  33 

change  his  navy,  that  new  ships  needed  a  new  class  of  seamen. 
He  saw  that  a  time  had  come  when  seamanship  was  a  science 
requiring  special  and  minute  training.  In  this  Spain  probably 
furnished  him  with  a  model.  There  seamanship  was  fully  recog- 
nized as  a  subject  of  systematic  and  a  scientific  teaching.  The 
Contractation  House  at  Seville  was  virtually  a  college  of  navi- 
gation, giving  instruction  and  conferring  degrees.1  Lectures 
were  given  from  a  chair  established  and  endowed  by  the 
Crown,  and  were  subsequently  published.  No  pilot  or  master 
was  allowed  to  sail  without  satisfying  the  authorities  of  the  Con- 
tractation House  that  he  might  be  safely  trusted  with  the  lives  of 
his  countrymen.  In  the  same  spirit  Henry  founded  three  guilds 
or  brotherhoods,  at  Deptford,  at  Kingston-upon-Hull,  and  at  New- 
castle-upon-Tyne. They  were  to  be  at  once  hospitals  for  retired 
seamen  who  had  been  disabled  or  had  fallen  into  poverty,  and 
colleges  for  the  instruction  of  their  younger  brethren.  In  the 
same  spirit  Sir  Thomas  Gresham  some  years  later  founded  lect- 
ures for  the  furtherance  of  seamanship.2  From  the  tone  in 
which  Hakluyt,  who  lived  a  generation  later,  wrote  of  these  well- 
meant  efforts,  it  would  seem  that  the  result  had  fallen  short  of  the 
intent,  but  we  cannot  doubt  that  they  bore  some  fruit,  and  even 
as  attempts  they  are  characteristic  of  the  age  and  honorable  to 
those  who  made  them.  The  removal  of  the  privileges  of  the 
Steelyard  Company  in  1520  marked  an  epoch  when  the  mer- 
chants of  England  should  no  longer  depend  on  foreign  ships  and 
mariners.  Another  symptom  of  the  increased  demand  for  shipping, 
and  of  the  importance  of  the  trades  connected  with  it,  is  the  fact 
that  in  1496  we  find  for  the  first  time  the  wages  of  shipwrights 
fixed  by  law.3  Everything  was  leading  up  to  a  time  when  the 
perils  of  the  seas  should  claim  all  that  was  most  heroic  in  Eng- 
land's most  heroic  age. 

As  I  have  said  before,  the  first  half  of  the  sixteenth  century 
was  in  naval  history  a  period  of  promise  rather  than  of  perform- 
Distant  ance,  yet  outward  results  were  not  wholly  wanting  to 
voyages.  ten  0f  fae  impending  change.  A  Bristol  merchant 
who  sent  cloth,  pack-thread,  and  soap  to  be  shipped  at „ Cadiz 
for  the  Teneriffe  market,  and  received  back  dyers'  moss,  sugar, 
and  kid  skins,  would  have  seemed  to  men  of  his  father's  genera- 

1  For  an  account  of  the  Contractation  House  at  Seville  see  Appendix  D. 

*  Hakluyt :  Epistle  dedicatory  to  his  Collection  of  Voyages,  1.  p.  xiii. 

*  Eden's  State  0/  the  Poor,  iii.  Appendix  II. 

3 


34     AMERICAN  DISCO  VER  Y  D  URLVG  XVIlh  CENTUR  Y. 

tion  one  of  the  most  enterprising  traders  of  his  day.1  Voyages- 
were  made  of  sufficient  extent  to  familiarize  the  minds  of  Eng- 
lishmen with  the  idea  of  distant  discovery.  In  151 1  the  Levan- 
tine trade  sprang  into  being.  Ships  from  London,  Southampton, 
and  Bristol  sailed  to  Sicily  and  the  Greek  isles,  and  had  even  been 
known  to  venture  as  far  as  Tripoli  and  Beyrout.2  The  voyages 
of  Rut  and  Hore,  as  we  have  already  seen,  could  have  done 
little  but  disgust  our  countrymen  with  the  northern  seas.  The 
less  ambitious  attempts  of  William  Hawkins  probably  did  more 
to  further  the  spirit  of  adventure.  In  the  Paul,  a  ship  of  250 
tons,  he  three  times  sailed  from  Plymouth  to  trade  on  the  coast 
of  Guinea  and  Brazil.3  From  one  of  these  voyages  he  brought 
back  a  native  king,  who  was  presented  at  Whitehall  to  Henry 
VIII.  The  spectacle  of  the  monarch,  described  as  having  holes 
drilled  in  his  cheeks,  "wherein  were  small  bones- planted,  in  his 
own  country  reputed  as  great  bravery,"  and  his  nether  lip  adorned 
with  a  ring  and  precious  stones,  may  well  have  "seemed  very 
strange  to  the  beholders,"  and  may  have  done  something  to  dis- 
pel any  wild  dreams  of  a  kingdom  of  El  Dorado,  which  threat- 
ened to  wreck  the  prospects  of  England  in  the  New  World  as 
they  were  wrecking  those  of  Spain.  Others  followed  in  the  track 
of  Hawkins,  and  by  the  year  1540  "the  commodious  and  gainful 
voyage  to  Brazil "  seems  to  have  been  regularly  pursued  by  the 
merchants  of  Southampton.4  The  progress  made  in  another 
quarter  has  a  closer  connection  with  our  subject.  In  1540  an  Act 
of  Parliament  forbidding  any  one  to  buy  fish  from  an  alien,  for  the 
purpose  of  detailing  it  in  an  English  market,  made  exceptions  in 
favor  of  Ireland,  Scotland,  Orkney,  Shetland,  Iceland  or  New 
Land.5  Another  Act  seven  or  eight  years  later  testifies  more  dis- 
tinctly to  the  importance  of  the  Newfoundland  fisheries.  It  pro- 
hibits any  of  the  officers  of  the  Admiralty  from  exacting  pre- 
tended dues  from  fishermen  plying  to  Iceland,  Newfoundland, 
Ireland,  and  other  fishing  stations.6  We  have  no  means  of  judg- 
ing of  the  extent  to  which  the  Newfoundland  fisheries  were  at 
this  time  pursued.  Thirty  years  later,  according  to  one  of 
Hakluyt's  correspondents,  fifty  ships  sailed  thither  from  Endand 


>  Hakluyt.  u.  457.  »/*.  ii.  aofi. 

•O.  iv.  198  No  reader/of  Mr.  Kingsley's  romance,  Westward  Ho,  is  likely  to  forget  the 
vivid  scene  where  Martin  Cockrem,  the  oldest  of  English  seamen  then  alive,  who  had  beer* 
left  by  William  Hawkins  as  a  hostage  with  the  natives,  tells  his  experience  to  the  heroes  of 
the  coming  struggle  with  the  Armada. 

I't^'S       ,vr,  «33  Henry  VIII.  2. 

•2  and  3  Edward  VI.  6. 


PROGRESS  OF  NA  VIGA  TION.  3S 

annually.1  The  same  letter  contains  a  detailed  account  not  only 
of  the  fisheries,  but  of  the  country  and  its  fitness  as  a  residence. 
We  may  infer  from  this  that  the  Newfoundland  fisheries  did 
something  to  suggest  to  Englishmen  the  idea  of  colonizing  North 
America. 

But  the  advance  which  had  been  made  during  the  first  half  of 
the  fifteenth  century,  substantial  though  it  was,  might  well  seem 
Outburst  dwarfish  and  paltry  when  compared  with  the  giant 
acfttvity  strides  of  the  next  twenty  years.  It  was  no  ignorant  con- 
about  1550.  tempt  for  an  earlier  generation  which  made  Hakluyt, 
when  writing  at  the  beginning  of  the  next  century,  say  that  in  the 
year  1553  there  was  "little  extent  of  our  men's  travels."2  At 
length,  however,  the  seed  which  had  so  long  germinated  sprung 
forth  and  bore  fruit.  In  the  words  of  an  old  writer,  "  It  pleased 
Almighty  God  of  His  infinite  mercy  at  length  to  awake  some  of 
our  worthy  countrymen  out  of  that  drowsy  dreame  wherein  we 
have  all  so  long  slumbered."3  The  seventy  years  preceding  the 
reign  of  Elizabeth  had  not  only  changed  English  modes  of 
thought  and  life,  they  had  begotten  a  new  race  of  Englishmen. 
Various  tendencies  had  combined  to  bring  about  this  growth. 
The  movement  which  in  theology  had  produced  the  Reformation, 
and  in  philosophy  contained  in  its  womb  the  teaching  of  Bacon 
and  of  the  seventeenth  century,  had  changed  the  social  and 
mercantile  as  well  as  the  political  life  of  the  nation.  The  homely 
fashions  which  had  contented  an  earlier  generation  no  longer 
satisfied  men  who  had  tasted  the  luxuries  of  Italy  and  the  East. 
Merchants  began  to  take  a  place  among  the  counselors  of  kings ; 
the  trader  no  longer  ranked  with  handicraftsmen,  he  was  the  rival 
of  cardinals  and  nobles.  There  were  special  reasons  why  the 
newly-awakened  life  of  the  nation  should  show  itself  on  the  seas. 
The  theoretical  discoveries  of  Galileo  and  the  practical  discov- 
eries of  Columbus  had  surrounded  seamanship  with  a  halo  alike 
of  scientific  and  romantic  interest.  The  middle  of  the  sixteenth 
century  was  one  of  those  epochs  in  which  two  ages  meet,  and 
which  combine  much  of  what  is  best  in  both.  The  simple  faith 
and  earnest  enthusiasm  of  the  age  that  was  passing  away  was 
combined  with  the  far-seeing  wisdom  of  that  which  was  begin- 
ning.    Nowhere  was  this  union  of  the  new  and  old  more  fully 

1  Hakluyt,  iii.  170. 

2  Dedicatory  letter  to  Sir  Robert  Cecil,  iv.  398. 
sSir  George  Peckham  in  Hakluyt,  iii.  21 1. 


36      A M ERICA N  DISCO  VER  Y  D URING  XVIth  CENTUR  Y. 

embodied  than  in  the  English  seamen  of  that  age.  In  men  like 
Hore  and  Gilbert  was  blended  in  no  small  measure  the  zeal  of 
the  mediaeval  crusader  with  the  wisdom  of  the  modern  philos- 
opher. And  though  the  age  may  have  been  in  its  nature  and 
its  ultimate  results  an  age  of  skepticism,  there  was  nothing  to 
check,  much  to  foster,  that  spirit  of  belief  which  is  needful  for 
most  great  deeds,  and  which  had  no  small  share  in  the  great 
deeds  of  that  time.  A  period  of  widely  spread  and  suddenly 
developed  intellectual  activity,  and  of  revolution  in  the  world  of 
thought,  may  be  for  the  philosopher  an  age  of  inquiry  and 
denial,  but  for  the  generality  of  men  it  will  be  an  age  of  unques- 
tioning and  passionate  belief.  And,  indeed,  we  cannot  won- 
der at  the  credulity  of  a  generation  which  had  seen  the  dis- 
covery of  a  new  world,  and,  as  it  seemed  to  many,  the  creation 
of  a  new  faith.  When  such  a  man  as  Raleigh  could  be  beguiled 
by  the  words  of  an  ignorant  and  lying  savage  into  the  belief  in 
a  kingdom  far  exceeding  in  its  riches  and  splendor  either  Mexico 
or  Peru,  we  may  judge  what  were  the  dreamy  hopes  which  led 
less  educated  men  to  seek  adventures  in,  the  New  World.1 

The  first  channel  into  which  the  new-born  energy  of  the  nation 
flowed  was  the  trade  with  Guinea.  The  first  of  the  recorded 
voyages  voyages  thither  illustrates  the  need  which  England  had 
to  Guinea.  for  a  system  0f  training  like  that  of  the  Contractation 
House,  and  the  mischiefs  which  might  ensue  from  the  lack  of  it. 
Two  ships  sailed  from  Portsmouth,  well  furnished  with  capable 
men  and  fitting  supplies.  The  pilot  was  a  Portuguese,  Anthony 
Pinteado,  sober,  discreet  and  skillful  in  his  business.  The  cap- 
tain, one  Windham,  seems  to  have  been  obdurate  and  headstrong. 
He  fell  into  an  error  common  among  the  voyagers  of  that  age, 
and  preferred  an  uncertain  quest  after  gold  to  what  would  have 
been  a  sure  and  gainful  trade  in  pepper.  Pinteado  remonstrated, 
but  his  wiser  counsels  were  treated  with  contempt.  His  nation- 
ality, in  all  probability,  told  against  him.  The  crew  became  dis- 
orderly, and  fell  sick  through  carelessness  in  their  diet.  Wind- 
ham and  Pinteado  both  died,  and  of  the  seven  score  men  who 
sailed  forty  only  returned.  If  the  Spanish  system  had  existed  in 
England  the  voyage  would  have  had  an  English  pilot  and  a  capa- 
ble captain.     Again,  in  the  account  of  a  voyage  to  Guinea  in 

>  Raleigh's  belief  in  Manoa  is  attested  ifi  a  letter  from  him  to  Cecil.     His  evidence  for  it 
—  the  statement  of  an  Indian  conveyed  through  a  Spaniard.      See  Edward's  Life  of  Ra- 


Jeigk,  i.  tq8,  ii.  109 


VOYAGES  TO  RUSSIA.  37 

1556  we  find  the  captain,  William  Towrson,  saying,  "  I  think  the 
willful  master  ran  in  with  the  shore  of  purpose,  being  offended 
that  I  told  him  of  his  folly."  Notwithstanding  this  disheartening 
start,  the  Guinea  voyages  went  on  without  intermission  for  the 
next  four  years.  From  that  time  there  is  a  gap  of  five  years  in 
our  records,  and  then  we  find  five  more  voyages  in  the  next  six 
years.1  These  adventures  were  not  confined  to  merchants  and 
traders.  Among  the  promoters  of  them  we  find  the  names  of 
Sir  George  Barne,  Sir  John  Yorke,  Sir  William  Chester,  and  Sir 
Thomas  Gerrard.  In  an  entry  among  the  State  Papers  we  read 
that  the  Earls  of  Pembroke  and  Leicester  hired  a  ship  from  the 
Admiralty,  for  five  hundred  pounds,  to  trade  on  the  coast  of 
Africa  and  America.2  Another  entry  in  the  State  Papers  con- 
nects these  Guinea  voyages  with  American  history  in  a  specially 
painful  manner.  We  read  how  Sir  John  Hawkins  purposes  "  to 
lade  negroes  in  Genoya  (Guinea),  and  to  sell  them  in  the  West 
Indies  in  truck  of  gold,  pearls  and  emeralds." 3  To  us  these  voy- 
ages are  chiefly  interesting  as  illustrating  the  adventurous  spirit  of 
the  age,  and  as  having  doubtless  furnished  one  of  the  motives 
which  induced  England  to  acquiesce  in  the  Spanish  monopoly  of 
the  New  World. 

Another  symptom  of  the  new  era  is  the  return  of  Sebastian 
Cabot.     In  1549,  the  third  year  of  Edward  VI. 's  reign,  his  serv- 

Voyages  lces  at  ^ast  met  Wltn  a  Porti°n  °f  tne  reward  they  had 
to  Russia,  deserved,  and  he  was  made  Grand  Pilot  of  England, 
with  pay  of  £166  13s.  \d}  Age  had  not  lessened  his  eagerness 
for  discovery,  but  America  was  no  longer  the  field  of  his  labors. 
He,  like  most  of  the  navigators  of  his  age,  attached  more  value 
to  the  visionary  project  of  a  northeast  or  northwest  passage  to 
Asia  than  to  the  solid  gain  which  the  American  trade  and  fisher- 
ies placed  within  their  grasp.  In  1553  a  company  was  formed 
under  the  governorship  of  Cabot  for  the  discovery  of  a  north- 
east passage.  A  stock  of  six  thousand  pounds  was  subscribed  in 
shares  of  twenty-five  pounds  each.  The  orders  of  the  company, 
drawn  up  by  Cabot,  are  worthy  of  attention.     An  oath  of  obedi- 

1  These  voyages  are  all  given  in  the  second  volume  of  Hakluyt.  Two  of  them  are  told  in 
doggerel  rhyme  by  Robert  Baker,  who  conducted  them ;  the  composition  beguiled  the  weari- 
ness of  a  French  prison.  The  manner  in  which  they  are  told  is  characteristic  of  the  age. 
The  personages  of  the  heathen  mythology  are  dragged  in  at  every  turn  and  the  final  warning 
to  leave  the  coast  is  given  in  a  dream,  when  Vulcan  pleads  before  Jupiter  in  behalf  of  his 
children,  the  negroes. 

2  Domestic  State  Papers,  1565,  Oct.  23. 

*  lb.  1567,  Sept.  15.  *  Purchas's  Pilgrims,  iii.  808. 


38 


AMERICAN  DISCO  VER  Y  D  WRING  XVI th.  CENTUR  Y. 


ence  to  the  crown,  the  captain-general,  and  the  captains  and 
masters  was  to  be  enforced.  Prayers  are  to  be  read  on  shipboard 
every  morning  and  evening.  Blasphemy,  gaming,  and  quarrel- 
ing are  strictly  forbidden.  All  trade  is  to  be  under  the  control  of 
the  captains  and  certain  officers  called  the  Cape  merchants,  and 
all  private  traffic  is  strictly  forbidden.  Humanity  to  the  natives 
is  enjoined,  and  all  offenses  against  the  chastity  of  their  women 
are  specially  denounced.  All  attempts  at  religious  conversion 
are  prohibited.  Possibly  Cabot  had  sufficiently  definite  ideas 
about  the  countries  sought  after  to  know  they  would  be,  for  the 
most  part,  occupied  by  professed  Christians.  It  is  worthy  of 
note  that  no  provision  was  made  against  the  danger  of  private 
ambition.  The  oath  taken  by  the  captains  and  masters,  and 
preserved  by  Hakluyt,  bound  them  to  a  full  and  faithful  execu- 
tion of  the  objectsat  which  the  voyages  aimed,  but  did  not  seem 
to  contemplate  the  chance  of  their  abusing  the  powers  given  them 
for  personal  ends.  It  was  purely  a  voyage  of  trade  and  discovery, 
not  of  conquest,  and  it  was  needless  to  guard  against  the  designs 
of  a  Cortez  or  a  Pizzaro. 

Three  ships  under  Sir  Hugh  Willoughby  were  sent  out  in  May, 
1553.  Sir  Hugh  himself,  with  two  ships'  crews,  was  found  two 
years  later  frozen  in  a  river  of  Lapland.  Yet  the  voyage  was  no 
failure.  The  third  vessel,  under  the  command  of  Richard  Chan- 
cellor, reached  the  Bay  of  St.  Nicholas.  Her  wise  and  daring 
captain  made  his  way  to  the  court  of  Moscow,  and  astonished 
his  countrymen  by  his  account  of  the  great  Slavonic  Empire  with 
its  strange  mixture  of  grandeur  and  barbarism.  The  route  thus 
opened  by  Chancellor  was  resolutely  followed  up. 

The  company  obtained  in  1554  a  charter  of  corporation  under  the 
title  of  the  "  Merchant  Adventurers  for  the  Discovery  of  Lands, 
Countries,  and  Isles  not  known  or  frequented  by  any  English." 
Annual  voyages  were  made  to  Russia,  and  six  years  later  Anthony 
Jenkinson,  the  most  enterprising  northern  traveler  of  his  age, 
penetrated  by  land  from  Moscow  to  the  court  of  the  Shah.1 

The  account  of  the  second  of  these  voyages  has  a  special  in- 
terest for  us.     It  contains  one  of  the  few  recorded  events  which 

seebashti0an  throw  a  §leam  of  H§ht  uPon  the  career  a»d  personal 
Cabot.  character  of  Cabot.  Stephen  Burrough,  a  worthy  fol- 
lower of  Chancellor,  and  his  companion  in  the  voyage  of  1556, 

I  The  authorities  for  Chancellor's  voyage  are  all  to  be  found  in  the  first  volume  of  Hak- 
luyt. 


DEATH  OF  CABOT.  39 

has  left  an  account  of  the  expedition.  He  tells  us  how  Cabot, 
with  a  company  of  gentlemen  and  gentlewomen,  came  on  board 
his  vessel  at  Gravesend,  and  how  they  were  feasted  there;  after 
which  the  "  good  old  gentleman  "  gave  liberal  alms  to  the  poor, 
and  asked  them  to  pray  for  the  success  of  the  voyage.  The  con- 
cluding episode  is  best  told  in  the  writer's  own  words.  "And 
then  at  the  sign  of  the  Christopher  he  and  his  friends  banqueted, 
and  made  me  and  them  that  were  in  the  company  great  cheer : 
and  for  very  joy  that  he  had  to  see  the  towardness  of  our  intended 
discovery,  he  entered  into  the  dance  himself  amongst  the  rest  of 
the  young  and  holy  company :  which  being  ended,  he  and  his 
friends  departed,  commending  us  to  the  governance  of  Almighty 
God."  In  the  next  year  we  find  that  Cabot  had  to  share  his  office 
and  his  salary  with  an  associate,  William  Worthington.1  There 
we  lose  sight  of  him,  only  to  meet  him  again  on  his  death-bed. 
His  friend,  Richard  Eden,  sat  by  him  in  his  last  moments,  and 
from  him  we  learn  that  the  mind  of  the  great  discoverer  was  busy 
even  at  the  last  with  the  problems  and  pursuits  of  his  lifetime.2 
The  time  and  place  of  his  death  are  alike  unknown.  For  once 
posterity  has  dealt  less  justly  with  greatness  than  did  its  own  age. 
To  the  men  of  that  day  Sebastian  Cabot  was  a  hero  and  a  leader, 
to  us  he  is  little  more  than  a  dim  and  shadowy  name. 

Voyages  to  Guinea  and  Archangel  did  not  long  suffice  to  em- 
ploy the  new-born  energy  of  English  seamen,  and  they  soon 
Movement  betook  themselves  to  that  great  task  which  forms  their 
Amedcan  best  clami  to  tne  gratitude  of  posterity.  The  barriers 
discovery,  which  had  withheld  England  from  a  career  of  Ameri- 
can exploration  and  conquest  gradually  gave  way.  Spain  was  no 
longer  an  ally  to  be  respected,  but  a  dangerous  and  hated  rival. 
The  recollection  of  Philip  and  his  Spanish  courtiers  riding  into 
London,  decked  in  the  spoils  of  Mexico  and  Peru,  must  have 
been  at  once  dazzling,  enraging,  and  animating.  Might  not 
England  fight  Spain  on  her  own  ground  and  with  her  own  weap- 
ons ?  Might  not  the  treasures  of  the  New  World  be  used  to 
support  England  and  the  Gospel,  not  Spain  and  the  Inquisition  ? 
Even  the  thirst  for  gold  was  ennobled  when  thus  linked  with  the 
cause  of  national  greatness  and  religious  freedom.  Another  mo- 
tive ought  not  in  justice  to  be  overlooked.  As  in  the  search  for 
gold,  so  in  the  conversion  of  the  Indians,  Spain  was  at  once  a 

1  Rymer,  xv.  466. 

s  Nicholls's  Life  0/  Cabot,  p.  186. 


4o      AMERICA N  DISCO  I  ER  Y  D  URING  X Villi  CENTUR  Y. 

pattern  and  a  rival.  To  carry  out  the  Gospel  to  wild  races  dwell- 
ing in  distant  lands  was  a  task  peculiarly  suited  to  the  temper  of 
an  adventurous  generation  that  had  just  passed  through  a  great 
religious  crisis.  Such  was  the  combination  of  influences  under 
which  England  entered  upon  her  career  in  the  New  World.  The 
reign  of  Mary  had  repressed,  but  in  no  way  destroyed,  the  new- 
born spirit  of  the  nation.  When  that  evil  time  was  at  an  end, 
and  a  popular,  ambitious,  and  enterprising  queen  sat  on  the 
throne,  the  torrent  burst  forth  in  full  strength.  From  thirty  to 
fifty  ships  sailed  every  year  to  the  Newfoundland  fisheries. 
Privateers  harassed  the  treasure  ships  on  the  coast  of  South 
America,  and  before  long  the  English  flag  became  a  terror  to  the 
dwellers  in  every  Spanish  seaport  from  St.  Augustine  to  Cumana. 
Spain  became  each  year  more  hated  and  less  feared.  The  infec- 
tion of  the  gold  fever  seized  the  wisest  and  bravest  Englishmen 
of  the  day.  The  dreams  of  the  alchemists  revived  in  a  changed 
form,  and,  like  the  alchemists,  the  seamen  of  that  age  sought  the 
Vindiscoverable,  and  found  treasure  by  the  way  whose  value  they 
knew  not.  The  men  who  sailed  with  Drake  to  plunder  the 
Spaniard,  or  followed  Frobisher  in  his  wild  search  for  a  northern 
El  Dorado,  were  unconsciously  taking  no  small  part  in  the  colo- 
nization of  America.  Their  efforts,  even  when  they  failed,  served 
to  familiarize  Englishmen  with  the  newly-discovered  lands. 
Savages  were  seen  in  the  streets  of  Plymouth  and  London,  and 
people  began  to  learn  that  the  regions  beyond  the  seas  were  not 
wholly  peopled  by 

Anthropophagi  and  men  whose  heads 
Do  grow  beneath  their  shoulders. 

The  New  World  did  not  lose  anything  of  its  charms  and  marvels, 
but  it  lost  something  of  its  terrors.  The  men,  indeed,  who 
wrought  this  change  had  little  in  common  with  those  who  profited 
by  it.  Only  one  or  two  far-sighted  statesmen  like  Raleigh  fore- 
saw the  colonization  of  the  next  age.  The  adventurers  of  the 
sixteenth  century  would  for  the  most  part  have  looked  with  little 
favor  on  the  religious  and  political  motives  which  led  to  the  set- 
tlement of  New  England.  But  though  they  may  not  have  fore- 
seen the  nature  of  the  harvest,  they  1  elped  to  sow  the  seed.  If 
Gilbert  had  never  sailed,  the  fathers  of  Plymouth  would  in  all 
likelihood  have  lived  and  died  in  Holland. 

An  important  symptom  and  accompaniment  of  this  movement 


LITEFA  TURE  OF  NA  I  VGA  TION.  4  x 

was  the  rapid  growth  of  a  literature  of  navigation  and  discov- 
Literature  ery.  It  is  scarcely  too  much  to  say  that  a  complete 
tionfvlga"  history  of  the  subject  sprung  into  existence  during  the 
latter  half  of  the  sixteenth  century.  Sebastian  Cabot  himself 
published  maps  and  documents,  now  unhappily  lost.  Of  the  ex- 
tant records  of  English  voyages  of  that  date,  the  earliest  proba- 
bly was  Chancellor's  account  of  his  journey  to  Moscow,  taken 
down  from  his  own  lips  by  Clement  Adams,  and  published  in 
1555.  Two  years  earlier  such  portions  of  Sebastian  Munster's 
"  Cosmography  "  as  referred  to  the  newly-discovered  world  had 
been  translated  into  English  by  Richard  Eden,  and  this  was  fol- 
lowed by  an  English  version  of  Peter  Martyr's  "  Decades  of  the 
New  World,"  by  Richard  Eden  and  Richard  Wylles.  Oral  evi- 
dence, we  may  be  sure,  was  not  wanting  to  feed  the  curiosity  thus 
excited.  Before  many  years  there  was  scarcely  a  fishing  village 
in  Devonshire  without  some  hero  of  its  own  to  tell  of  the  Para- 
dise that  he  had  seen  and  the  plate  ships  that  he  had  helped  to 
plunder.  The  mind  of  the  nation  was  thoroughly  aroused.  No- 
ble and  ignoble  motives  worked  together.  The  brave,  the  wise, 
and  the  pious,  as  well  as  the  idle  and  rapacious,  were  hurried  into 
the  great  gulf  stream  of  maritime  adventure. 

As  might  have  been  expected,  the  new  movement  found  its 
foremost  pioneers  in  the  West  of  England.  We  have  seen  how 
Spirit  of  tne  seaports  of  Devonshire  had  early  become  the  main 
?n  the  "se  strongholds  of  maritime  enterprise.  Besides,  there  were 
West-  special  features  of  temper  and  training  which  fitted  the 
men  of  Devon  to  become  leaders  in  the  task  of  discovery.  Dev- 
onshire in  the  sixteenth  century  was  distinguished  from  the  rest 
of  England  by  its  spirit  of  enterprise  and  progress,  as  much  as 
Lancashire  and  Yorkshire  are  now.  The  inhabitants,  though 
English  by  blood,  were  strongly  leavened  with  the  imagination 
and  versatility  of  the  Celt.  The  genial  air,  the  free,  open  moor- 
lands, interspersed  with  fertile  valleys  and  richly-wooded  bays, 
neither  depressed  the  soul  of  man  like  the  dreary  wilds  of  the 
North,  nor  lulled  it  into  sluggish  content  like  the  rich  pastoral 
Midlands.  It  was  a  land  which-  forbade  either  sloth  or  squalor. 
Innumerable  bays  and  natural' harbors  studded  with  fishing  vil- 
lages furnished  schools  for  a  venturesome  race  of  seamen.  Man- 
ufactures, improved  by  skilled  workmen  from  Italy  and  France, 
insured  a  class  of  wealthy  and  enterprising  merchants.  More- 
over the  West,  above  all  districts  of  England,  seems  to  have  pos- 


42      A  ME  RICA  N  DISCO  VER  Y  D  URIKG  XVI th  CENTUR  Y. 

sessed  a  numerous  gentry  bound  by  constant  intermarriages  into 
a  great  clan,  strongly  animated  by  local  pride  and  by  a  peculiar 
love  for  their  country.  Thus  most  of  the  land  was  in  the  hands 
of  well-born  commoners,  not  wholly  severed  from  the  yeomanry 
and  merchants.  All  classes,  leaders  and  followers  alike,  were 
ready  to  throw  themselves  into  the  new  career  which  was  open- 
ing before  the  nation. 

The  first  attempt  at  American  plantation  in  the  reign  of  Eliz- 
abeth, if,  indeed,  it  can  be  called  an  attempt,  was  not  such  as  to 
stukeiey  do  credit  to  its  promoters  or  to  further  the  cause  of 
Florida  colonization.  Yet  it  requires  notice  as  illustrating  more 
scheme.'  than  one  aspect  of  our  subject.  Thomas  Stukeiey  was 
a  younger  son  of  a  good  Devonshire  family.  Rumor,  indeed, 
gave  him  a  more  conspicuous  though  less  reputable  parentage, 
and,  with  apparently  but  slight  grounds,  sought  to  father  him  on 
Henry  VIII.  If  this  were  true,  he  seems  to  have  inherited  all  the 
failings  of  the  Tudors,  their  reckless  violence  and  unscrupulous- 
ness,  without  their  redeeming  virtues  of  steadfastness  and  public 
spirit.  Both  in  his  character  and  his  career,  Stukeiey  was  the 
typical  soldier  of  the  sixteenth  century,  with  all  his  features  in- 
tensified and  exaggerated.  He  was  at  once  a  daring  and  skillful 
captain,  an  unscrupulous  politician  of  the  school  of  Machiavelli, 
a  braggart,  an  adventurer,  and  a  citizen  of  the  world.  Himself  a 
Papist,  he  was  equally  ready  to  serve  a  Romanist  king  of  France 
and  a  Protestant  Lord  Protector  of  England.  At  one  time  we 
find  him  plotting  with  the  French  Government  against  his  native 
country,  then  serving  under  the  Duke  of  Savoy  against  France. 
His  one  point  of  contact  .with  our  subject  is  slight,  yet  important. 
In  1563  we  find  him  planning,  with  the  sanction  of  the  Crown, 
an  expedition  to  colonize  Florida,  a  term  vaguely  applied  to  the 
territory  north  of  the  Bay  of  Mexico.  Stukeiey  was  not  ill-fitted 
for  the  career  of  an  English  Pizarro,  but  it  seems  doubtful  whether 
he  ever  seriously  contemplated  such  an  attempt.  This  much  only 
can  we  extract  from  the  imperfect  and  scattered  records  at  our 
disposal ;  that  Stukeiey  at  once  converted  his  proposed  attempt 
at  colonization  into  a  buccaneering  expedition  against  French 
and  Spanish  vessels,  and  that  the  queen  took  no  precautions  to 
guard  against  any  such  misuse  of  his  privileges,  nor  showed  any 

1  The  whole  career  of  Stukeiey  has  been  carefully  worked  out  by  Mr.  Richard  Simpson  in 
a  work  entitled  TJie  School  f  Shnkes/>ere.  Among  the  plays  in  this  volume  is  one  entitled 
The  Famous  History  0/  the  Life  ami  Death  0/  Sir  Thomas  Stucley.  Mr.  Simpson  has 
prefaced  this  with  an  elaborate  biographical  essay. 


STUKELEY.  43 

serious  resentment  when  his  change  of  purpose  was  fully  discov- 
ered. If,  as  some  have  thought,  she  herself  was  prepared  to  profit 
by  his  successes,  she  was  but  anticipating  her  policy  of  a  few 
years  later  towards  Drake  and  Hawkins.  The  scheme,  whether 
for  colonization  or  piracy,  failed:  Stukeley  passes  from  the  scene, 
and  after  a  series  of  adventures  as  strange,  as  diversified,  and  as 
discreditable  as  his  earlier  career,  he  fell  by  a  death  nobler  than 
his  life,  at  the  side  of  King  Sebastian  on  the  field  of  Alcazar. 
Aimless  and  unproductive  though  his  so-called  "  Florida  scheme" 
was,  yet  it  is  not  without  interest  and  importance  both  in  the 
ideas  that  prompted  it  and  in  its  indirect  results.  It  shows  us, 
what  we  shall  see  more  fully  illustrated  hereafter,  how  closely 
connected  in  that  age  were  the  careers  of  the  colonist  and  the 
buccaneer,  how  easily  one  passed  into  the  other,  and  how  widely 
the  schemes  for  plantations  in  that  day  differed  from  the  sober  com- 
mercial attempts  of  the  next  century.  Moreover,  Stukeley's 
scheme  gives  an  explanation  and  a  legitimate  reason  for  the  hos- 
tility shown  by  Spain  to  our  schemes  for  colonization,  over  and 
above  her  intense  jealousy  of  a  rival  on  the  American  continent. 
We  may  well  believe  that  the  Spanish  statesmen  of  the  day  saw 
in  Gilbert  and  Raleigh,  perhaps  even  in  the  founders  of  the  Vir- 
ginia Company,  the  followers  and  imitators  of  Stukeley,  and 
measured  their  projects  by  those  of  their  predecessor.  They 
must  have  known  too  that  Stukeley  was  acting  with  the  conniv- 
ance, if  not  under  the  direct  instructions,  of  the  Crown,  and  they 
may  well  have  been  imbued  with  a  deep  distrust  for  that  policy 
of  maritime  enterprise  which  was  cherished  by  Elizabeth  and  her 
leaders. 

The  hopes  of  English  colonization  were  soon  entrusted  to 
worthier  hands.  It  would  be  gross  injustice  to  liken  a  high- 
Sir  minded  and  patriotic  man  such  as  Gilbert  to  an  un- 
GiiberV.rey  scrupulous,  self-seeking  adventurer  like  Stukeley.  Yet 
between  the  two  there  is  enough  in  common  to  remind  us  how 
closely  intermingled  were  the  nobler  and  meaner  aspects  of  that 
age,  how  narrow  was  the  gulf  which  separated  its  highest  aspira- 
tions from  its  lower  and  baser  aims.  Gilbert,  like  Stukeley,  was 
a  member  of  an  old  Devonshire  family.  His  ancestral  home  yet 
stands,  stately  in  its  decay.  The  Atlantic  gales  roared  around  its 
watch-tower,  and  from  the  neighboring  hills  Gilbert  must  have 
looked  down  on  the  noble  harbor  of  Tor  Bay.  All  the  land 
around  is  lovely,  with  the  peculiar  beauty  of  the  West ;  neither 


!-- 


44     AMERICAN  DISCOVERY  DURING  XVIth  CENTURY. 

stern  nor  languid,  a  beauty  which  neither  awes  nor  enervates.  It 
would  be  hard  to  find  a  spot  richer  in  romantic  influences ;  more 
fit  to  train  up  a  child  in  those  dreamy  hopes  which  allured  the 
seamen  of  that  age. 

An  Eton  and  Oxford  scholar,  a  soldier  in  the  religious  wars  of 
the  Continent,  then  governor  of  the  province  of  Munster, 'Gilbert 
was  thoroughly  steeped  in  the  literary  culture  and  the  military 
and  political  training  of  that  versatile  generation.  Gradually  all 
lesser  aims  and  ambitions  gave  way  before  the  great  purpose  of 
his  life. 

About  1565  we  meet  with  the  first  traces  of  Gilbert's  project 
of  colonization.  In  the  autumn  of  that  year  a  corporation  was 
His  first  established  by  Act  of  Parliament,  for  the  discovery  of 
scheme.  new  trades.1  Gilbert  was  a  member  of  it,  and  soon 
after  we  find  him  presenting  a  memorial  to  the  queen  in  virtue  of 
his  position.  The  scheme  suggested  in  this  memorial  included 
the  discovery  of  a  Northwest  passage  to  Cathay,  the  establish- 
ment of  a  traffic  with  that  country,  and  the  colonization  of  the 
intermediate  lands.  His  petition  asks  that  he  may  have  the  use 
of  two  of  the  queen's  ships  for  the  first  four  voyages,  with  the  right 
to  press  seamen,  that  he  and  his  heirs  may  enjoy  certain  exemp- 
tions from  customs,  and  certain  shares  on  all  profits,  and  that  he 
may  be  appointed  governor  of  all  such  lands  as  he  may  discover, 
with  the  right  to  nominate  a  deputy.2  The  first  effect  of  this  pro- 
posal seems  to  have  been  to  bring  Gilbert  into  conflict  with  the 
Merchant  Adventurers  Company.  The  members  of  the  company, 
however,  showed  themselves  ready  to  accept  a  compromise. 
Anthony  Jenkinson  was  deputed  to  confer  with  him,  and  the 
merchant  adventurers  formally  proposed  that  Gilbert  should  ac- 
cept the  freedom  of  the  company  and  be  appointed  to  conduct  a 
voyage  on  their  behalf.  Gilbert  seems  to  have  accepted  the  ar- 
rangement, but  for  some  unknown  reason  the  proposal  bore  no 
fruit.3 

After  this  Gilbert  seems  for  a  while  to  have  stood  aloof  from 
any  practical  attempt.  He  did  not,  however,  neglect  the  great 
project  of  his  life.  Before  long  he  wrote  a  pamphlet  entitled 
"  A  Discourse  to  prove  a  passage  by  the  Northwest  to  Cataya  and 

1  By  a  private  Act  in  the  eighth  of  Elizabeth. 

s  The  Memorial,  with  Cecil's  reply,  is  published  in  an  epitomized  form  in  Mr.  Sainsbury's 
Calendar  of  Colonial  State  Papers  relating  to  the  West  Indies,  No.  13. 
8  Colonial  Papers  (East  Indies).     Nos.  12-15. 


GILBERT'S  "DISCOURSE."  45 

the  East  Indies."  l  In  it  he  sets  forth  the  feasibility  of  the  effort 
and  the  gain  which  may  be  expected  to  result  from  it.  Like 
Gilbert's  Thorne,  he  appears  to  ignore  the  possibility  of  an  ice- 
course."  bound  sea,  and  to  suppose  that  a  continuous  ocean  nec- 
essarily implies  the  possibility  of  a  passage.  The  sanguine  and 
enthusiastic  nature  of  the  man,  fitter  to  contrive  than  to  execute, 
and  more  likely  to  show  others  the  way  to  succeed  than  to 
achieve  success  himself,  is  manifest  in  every  page.  Every  chance 
story  that  may  serve  to  illustrate  the  possibility  of  a  passage  is 
pressed  into  his  service.  There  is  a  characteristic  mixture  of  the 
credulous,  uncritical  spirit  of  the  middle  ages  with  the  restless, 
enterprising,  half-scientific  temper  of  the  sixteenth  century.  For 
us  the  most  interesting  part  of  the  document,  and  that  which 
connects  itself  most  closely  with  Gilbert's  later  scheme,  is  the 
summary  of  the  advantages  to  be  expected.  He  first  appeals  to 
that  belief  in  unknown  lands  of  boundless  wealth  which  figured 
so  largely  in  the  dreamlike  projects  of  the  age.  "  It  were  the 
only  way  for  our  princes  to  possess  all  the  wealth  of  the  East 
parts  (as  they  term  them)  of  the  world,  which  is  infinite."  Such 
promises  were  sober  compared  to  the  wild  dreams  of  El  Dorado 
which  possessed  the  age  and  which  could  even  enslave  the  vig- 
orous mind  of  Raleigh.  Gilbert  then  proceeds  to  appeal  to  more 
commonplace  motives,  and  dwells  upon  the  acquisition  of  a  valu- 
able eastern  trade.  With  one  of  those  strange  appeals  to  Scripture 
which  are  not  confined  to  the  Puritans  of  that  day,  he  points  out  the 
probable  demand  for  European  goods  in  the  East,  auguring  from 
the  example  of  "  the  great  king  of  India,  Assuerus,  who  matched 
the  colored  clothes  wherewith  his  houses  and  tents  were  appar- 
elled with  gold  and  silver  as  part  of  his  greatest  treasure."  But 
for  us  by  far  the  most  interesting  feature  of  the  discourse  is  the 
prospect  which  Gilbert  holds  out  that  "  we  might  inhabit  some 
part  of  those  countries  and  settle  there  such  needy  people  of  our 
own  which  now  trouble  the  commonwealth,  and  through  want 
here  at  home  are  enforced  to  commit  outrageous  offenses,  whereby 
they  are  daily  consumed  by  the  gallows." 

Gilbert  himself  did  not  publish  this  pamphlet,  thinking,  per- 
haps, that  it  might  be  disapproved  of  at  Court,  as  likely  to  embroil 
Frobisher's  tne  country  with  Spain.  Despite  his  precautions,  it 
voyages,      found  its  way  into  print,  and  brought  about  one  of  the 

1  This  pamphlet  is  published  in  Hakluyt,  iii.  32.     Two  copies  of  the  original  edition  are  in 
the  British  Museum. 


46     AMERICAN  DISCOVERY  DURING  XVIth  CENTURY. 

most  memorable  adventures  of  the  age.  Among  Gilbert's  ac- 
quaintance was  one  George  Gascoigne,  a  man  of  some  literary 
fame,  and,  as  it  would  seem,  a  friend  of  Raleigh.1  He,  being 
struck  with  the  "  Discourse,"  obtained  the  manuscript  of  it, 
showed  it  to  at  least  one  of  his  friends,  and,  seemingly  without 
Gilbert's  approval,  published  it.  The  friend  to  whom  Gascoigne 
showed  the  document  was  a  kinsman  of  his  own,  Martin  Fro- 
bisher,  who  was  already  meditating  schemes  of  northern  explora- 
tion.2 Gilbert's  pamphlets  gave  a  definite  form  to  his  vague 
aspirations.3  His  exploits  lie  beyond  our  subject,  yet  they  are 
not  wholly  foreign  to  it.  There  could  be  no  more  effective  com- 
ment on  the  spirit  which  impelled  the  English  discoverers  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  its  heroic  yet  unstable  temper,  its  mixture  of 
far-reaching  schemes  with  an  absence  of  practical  and  detailed 
knowledge.  The  whole  career  of  Martin  Frobisher  may  indeed 
be  looked  on  as  a  type  and  epitome  of  Elizabethan  seamanship. 
He  had  served  his  apprenticeship  in  the  Guinea  voyages,  and 
had  been  implicated  in  a  charge  of  piracy,  no  serious  drawback 
probably  to  his  future  success.  He  found  a  patron  in  Michael 
Lok,  himself  a  merchant  captain  in  the  Levant,  and  the  son  of 
Sir  William  Lok,  who,  like  many  other  London  traders,  had  at- 
tained commercial  and  political  greatness  under  Henry  VIII. 

In  1576,  by  Lok's  exertions,  Frobisher  was  furnished  with  the 
funds  needful  for  his  enterprise,  and  during  that  and  the  two  fol- 
lowing years  he  made  three  voyages  to  the  northern  seas.  The 
records  of  that  adventurous  age  can  show  few  exploits  more  en- 
terprising, none  perhaps  less  fruitful.  In  his  first  voyage  Fro- 
bisher reached  the  coast  of  Labrador.  He  brought  home,  not 
the  report  of  a  Northwest  passage,  but  hopes  as  chimerical  and 
more  dangerous.  A  stone  which  he  found  was  reported  to  con- 
tain gold.  England  was  already  gold-mad,  and  the  prospect  of 
a  Northern  Peru  instantly  awakened  the  enthusiasm  of  those  who 
had  been  unmoved  by  the  project  of  a  Northwest  passage.  The 
Company  of  Cathay  was  formed,  with  Lok  as  Governor  and 
Frobisher  as  High  Admiral  of  the  newly-discovered  lands.  The 
two  voyages  which  ensued  were  disastrous  failures.     At  the  very 

1  For  the  connection  between  Raleigh  and  Gascoigne  see  Edwards's  Life  0/ Raleigh,  L  36. 

*  Gascoigne's  Introduction. 

8  Full  accounts  of  Frobisher's  voyages  are  to  be  found  in  the  third  volume  of  Hakluyt 

The  East  Ittdia  Colonial  Papers,  above  referred  to,  also  contain  many  documents  bearing 
on  the  subject  All  these  authorities  have  been  carefully  worked  up  by  the  Rev.  F.  Jones  ia 
his  Life  of  Sir  Martin  Frobisher,  1878. 


GILBERT'S  FIRST  VOYAGE.  47 

outset  they  illustrated  strikingly  one  of  the  chief  dangers  which 
beset  English  colonization.  Frobisher  obtained  a  royal  license 
to  take  criminals  from  the  gaols  with  whom  to  garrison  the  lands 
that  he  might  discover.  All  that  accrued  from  the  two  voyages 
was  a  vast  freight  of  earth,  supposed  to  be  full  of  gold,  but  soon 
found  to  be  wholly  worthless.  Had  the  colony  been  better 
planned,  had  the  gold  discoveries  been  real,  Frobisher's  faults  of 
temper,  his  arrogance  and  harshness  towards  his  men,  his  duplicity 
and  brutality  in  dealing  with  the  savages,  would  have  insured 
failure.  The  Company  disappears  with  a  storm  of  disputes  and 
recriminations  between  Frobisher  and  Lok,  and  the  curtain  falls 
dramatically  upon  the  figure  of  Isabella  Frobisher  petitioning  to 
be  delivered  from  the  starvation  which  her  husband's  recklessness 
had  brought  upon  herself  and  her  children. 

The  impulse  of  the  age  towards  American  colonization  was  too 
strong  to  be  checked  by  this  failure.  In  less  than  a  year  after 
Gilbert's  Frobisher's  last  disastrous  voyage  Gilbert  obtained  a 
patent.  patent  of  colonization  from  the  Queen.1  This  instru- 
ment gave  him  full  power  to  inhabit  and  fortify  all  lands  not  yet 
possessed  by  any  Christian  prince  or  people.  His  choice  of  a 
situation  was  restricted  by  no  geographical  limits.  Full  proprie- 
tary rights  were  granted  to  him  and  his  heirs  and  assignees  over 
all  land  within  two  hundred  lea'gues  of  the  place  in  which  during 
the  next  six  years  they  should  make  their  settlement.  The  only 
right  reserved  by  the  Crown  was  a  royalty  of  one-fifth  on  all 
precious  metals.  The  proprietors  had  full  power  of  making  laws 
and  ordinances,  "  as  near  as  conveniently  might  be  to  the  laws 
of  the  realm,  and  not  opposed  to  the  Christian  religion  as  pro- 
fessed by  the  Church  of  England."  Should  no  colony  be  founded 
within  six  years  the  patent  was  to  expire. 

On  the  strength  of  this  patent  a  number  of  gentlemen  associ- 
ated themselves  with  Gilbert  in  his  enterprise.  Even  after  the 
Gilbert's      royal  license  had  been  so  far  obtained  there  were  still 

first  voy-  / 

age.  difficulties  to  be  surmounted.     For  nearly  half  a  cent- 

ury from  this  time  English  colonists  had  a  persistent  and  watch- 
ful opponent  in  the  Spanish  Court.  For  one  short  and  glorious 
interval  that  opposition  was  as  little  heeded  by  the  English  Gov- 
ernment  as  by  the  English  nation.  But  that  time  had  not  yet 
come.  For  the  present  Gilbert  found  that  the  Privy  Council 
were  fully  inclined  to  support  the  Spanish  Government  in  thwart- 

J  The  Patent  is  given  in  Hakluyt,  iii.  £»> 


48      AMERICAN  DISCO  VER  Y  D  WRING  XVI Ih  CENTUR  Y. 

ing  his  efforts.  If  it  be  true,  as  some  have  thought,  that  he  was 
the  author  of  a  paper  still  extant,  entitled  "A  Discourse  how  Her 
Majesty  may  annoy  the  King  of  Spain  by  fitting  out  a  fleet  of 
shippes  of  war  under  pretense  of  a  voyage  of  discovery,  and  so 
fall  upon  the  enemies  shippes  and  destroy  his  trade  in  Newfound- 
land and  the  West  Indies,  and  possess  their  country,"  *  we  can 
well  understand  t\ie  uneasiness  which  his  projects  excited.  In 
April,  1579,  just  when  Gilbert's  laborious  preparations  had  been 
completed,  an  order  was  forwarded  to  him  from  the  Privy  Coun- 
cil commanding  him  either  to  give  up  his  voyage  or  to  furnish  se- 
curities for  his  good  behavior.  Before  this  difficulty  had  been 
surmounted  a  fresh  one  arose.  Just  in  the  very  crisis  on  which 
the  fate  of  the  voyage  depended,  some  of  Gilbert's  followers 
were  accused  of  having  attacked  and  plundered  a  Spanish  ship 
lying  in  Warfleet  Cove,  near  Dartmouth.  Immediately  an  order 
came  down  from  the  Privy  Council  that  restitution  was  to  be 
made  to  the  Spaniards,  and  that  neither  Gilbert  himself  nor  any 
of  his  followers  was  to  sail.  The  order  either  came  too  late  or 
was -disregarded,  and  on  the  23d  of  September,  1578,  Gilbert 
sailed  from  Dartmouth  with  a  fleet  of  eleven  ships,  victualed  for 
a  year.  The  same  ill  fate  which  had  so  nearly  kept  the  fleet  from 
sailing  seemed  to  dog  it  throughout.  One  of  the  ships  leaked 
and  had  to  be  left  behind,  and  soon  after  seven  more  deserted.2 

The  expedition  was  a  complete  failure,  and  left  Gilbert  too 
crippled  in  means  to  go  on  with  his  project.  In  1580  he  trans- 
ferred his  patent  to  Sir  Thomas  Gerrard  and  Sir  George  Peckham.3 
They  either  did  nothing  in  the  matter  or  failed  so  completely 
that  all  trace  of  their  effort  is  lost. 

In  1583  Gilbert  himself,  rather  than  allow  his  patent  to  expire, 
made  one  more  effort.     By  dint  of  selling  a  large  part  of  his 

SSSd''  knded  es!ate'  and  hy  the  aid  of  Raleigh,  who  fitted 
voyage.*      up  one  ship  at  a  cost  of  a  thousand  pounds,  the  need- 


J  This  document,  which  is  still  extant,  is  dated  the  6th  of  Nov.,  157*.  An  epitome  of  it  is 
given  m  the  Calendar  0/ Domestic  State  Papers,  1547-1580;  the  signature  has  been  erased, 
out  the  editor,  Mr.  Lemon,  conjectures  that  it  was  H.  Gylberte. 

"  Our  knowledge  of  this  voyage  is  mainly  derived  from  Edward  Hayes  (see  below).  The 
two  orders  of  Council  are  given  in  Mr.  Edward's  Life  0/  Raleigh  i  p  78 

3  Domestic  Papers,  1580,  p.  695.  ' 

*  There  is  a  full  account  of  this  voyage  written  by  Edward  Hayes  in  Hakluyt,  in.,  184 

^vlT^'  T .  CaPtam  a,nd  °Wner  °f  th£  "  G°lden  HInd>"  the  on]y  vessel  whichaccom 
plished  the  whole  voyage  and  returned  safe.  With  the  exception  perhaps  of  the  story  of 
Hore  s  voyage,  Hayes  «  narrative  is  the  r.ost  vivid  and  picturesque  of  all  those  collected  by 

m^ohlet  IT  Mil  t°  STC  Pa,"tiCU,arS  °f  thC  V°yage  giVCn  by  Sir  Ge0rSe  Peckham  »  a 
pamphletwhichw.il  be  hereafter  mentioned   The  wreck  of  the  "Delight"  and  the  subsequent 


GILBERT'S  SECOND  VOYAGE.  49 

ful  funds  were  raised.  Two  hundred  and  sixty  men  were  enlisted, 
and  a  fleet  of  five  ships  was  got  together,  the  largest  of  two  hun- 
dred, the  smallest  of  ten,  tons  burden.  No  cost  seems  to  have  been 
spared  on  this  attempt,  and  everything  was  arranged  with  a  view 
to  a  permanent  settlement,  and  to  the  establishment  of  friendly 
relations  and  trade  with  the  natives.  Indeed,  but  for  the  absence 
of  women  it  might  have  seemed  like  an  ancient  Greek  colony,  a 
miniature  community  complete  in  itself.  There  were  men  "of 
every  faculty,"  shipwrights,  masons,  carpenters,  smiths,  miners, 
and  smelters.  For  the  trade  with  the  savages  there  were  petty 
haberdasheries.  The  lighter  side  of  life  was  not  neglected. 
There  was  music  of  various  kinds,  with  morris-dancers  and  "  May- 
like conceits,"  and  that  personage  who  figures  so  prominently  in 
the  songs  and  plays  of  the  day,  the  hobby  horse,  had  his  place  in 
the  expedition.  The  intention  "  to  win  the  savage  people  by  all 
fair  means  possible/'  was  a  laudable  contrast  to  the  practice  of 
too  many  voyagers  in  that  day ;  but  the  use  made  of  the  limited 
space  at  command  showed  no  very  practical  temper. 

On  the  nth  of  June  they  sailed.  From  the  outset  the  voy- 
age was  unfortunate.  There  were,  as  we  shall  repeatedly  see, 
three  great  hindrances  to  the  success  of  the  first  English  colo- 
nists. But  for  thaW  uncalculating  and  indomitable  spirit  of  en- 
terprise which  urged  Drake  and  Hawkins  to  their  gallant  deeds 
against  the  Spaniards,  America  would  perhaps  have  never  been 
colonized  by  Englishmen.  Nevertheless  that  spirit  was  in  its 
direct  results  one  of  the  most  serious  obstacles  to  the  well- 
being  of  our  early  settlements.  The  belief  that  every  hill  in  the 
New  World  was  a  Potosi,  and  that  any  lawless  and  dissolute  ad- 
venturers, the  very  offscourings  of  England,  were  good  enough 
materials  for  a  colony,  delusions  which  have  already  come  under 
our  notice,  had  an  equally  pernicious  effect.  In  Gilbert's  voyage 
we  see  at  least  two,  probably  all,  of  these  evil  influences  at  work. 
The  fleet  had  only  set  sail  two  days,  when  the  ship  sent  by '-Ra- 
leigh, the  best  in  the  fleet,  deserted,  on  the  plea  that  the  captain 
and  some  of  the  crew  had  fallen  sick.  On  the  20th  of  July  the 
fleet  got  separated  in  a  fog,  and  two  ships,  the  Swallow  and  the 
Squirrel,  lost  sight  of  the  other  two.  The  crew  of  the  Swallow, 
freed  from  Gilbert's  control,  betook  themselves  to  piracy.  En- 
adventures  of  her  crew  are  told  in  "A  Relation  of  William  Clerk  of  Weymouth,  master  of 
a  ship  called  the  '  Delight,'  going  for  the  discovery  of  Norembega  with  Sir  Humphrey  Gil- 
bert, 1583.  Written  in  excuse  for  the  fault  of  casting  away  the  ship  and  men,  imputed  to  his 
oversight,"  Hakluyt,  lii,  206. 

4 


5o      AMERICAN DISCOVERY DURING  XVIth  CENTURY. 

countering  a  French  ship  on  her  homeward  voyage  from  New- 
foundland, they  hailed  her,  and  being  in  want  of  stores,  besought 
the  captain  to  supply  them.  They  then  seized  the  opportunity 
given  by  their  hospitable  reception  to  seize  the  ship  and  plunder 
her,  forcing  the  crew  by  torture  to  give  up  their  goods.  At  the 
end  of  July  Gilbert  reached  the  shore  of  Newfoundland,  and  in 
five  days  afterward  the  Swallow  appeared  in  Conception  Bay- 
On  the  same  day,  a  little  farther  down  the  coast,  the  other  miss- 
ing ship,  the  Squirrel,  rejoined  the  fleet.  They  then  prepared  to 
enter  St.  John's  harbor,  not  without  fear  of  resistance,  inasmuch 
as  there  were  thirty-six  ships  of  all  nations  in  the  port.  Their 
fears,  however,  were  unfounded,  and  all  the  ships,  especially  the 
Portuguese,  received  the  English  with  great  kindness.  Gilbert' 
then  produced  his  commission.  The  first  right  which  he  exer- 
cised under  it  was  to  demand  such  supplies  as  he  needed  at  a  fair 
rate,  while  at  the  same  time  he  offered  to  confer  any  reasonable 
privilege  upon  application.  Two  days  later  he  took  formal  pos- 
session in  the  queen's  name,  and  announced  his  intention  of 
governing  as  her  deputy.  He  then  enacted  three  laws,  not  with- 
out their  interest  for  us  as  the  first  specimen  of  English  legisla- 
tion in  the  New  World.  The  first  provided  that  "  religion  in 
public  exercise  should  be  according  to  the  Church  of  England  " ; 
the  second  that,  if  anything  were  attempted  prejudicial  to  her 
Majesty's  right  or  possession  of  those  territories,  the  offender 
shall  be  executed  as  in  a  case  of  high  treason,  according  to  the 
laws  of  England ;  the  third  that,  if  any  person  should  utter  words 
to  the  dishonor  of  her  Majesty,  he  should  lose  his  ears,  and  his 
ship  and  goods  should  be  confiscated.  The  whole  multitude, 
foreigners  as  well  as  English,  promised  obedience.  The  arms  of 
England  engraved  on  lead  were  fixed  on  a  pillar  of  wood.  Gil- 
bert then  proceeded  to  exercise  his  right  of  territorial  sovereignty 
by  granting  parcels  of  land  by  the  waterside  in  fee-farm  for  a 
yearly  rent.  All  that  was  seen  of  the  country  encouraged  the 
adventurers.  In  the  South,  Hayes  says,  possibly  with  a  shade 
of  irony,  they  "  found  no  inhabitants,  which  by  all  likelihood  have 
abandoned  these  coasts,  the  same  being  so  much  frequented  by 
Christians ;  but  in  the  North  are  savages  altogether  harmless." 
The  resources  of  the  country  more  than  fulfilled  their  hopes,  and 
made  them  "glorify  the  magnificent  God  who  hath  superabun- 
dantly replenished  the  earth  with  creatures  serving  for  the  use  of 
man."     Moreover,  the  chief  miner,  a  Saxon,  assured  Gilbert  that 


DISASTERS.  5I 

he  had  discovered  silver  ore.  Gilbert's  estimate  of  the  coun- 
try rose,  and  he  no  longer  showed  the  same  readiness  to  grant 
away  the  land  in  parcels  to  private  persons.  There  was,  how- 
ever, a  dark  side  to  the  picture.  Many  of  the  sailors  fell  sick. 
The  lawless  temper  of  the  adventurers  began  to  assert  itself. 
Many  deserted  and  hid  themselves  in  the  woods  till  they  could 
get  a  passage  home  in  some  fishing  vessel.  Some  even  tried  to 
steal  away  by  night  with  one  of  the  ships.  One  party  seized  a 
vessel  Jaden  with  fish,  turned  the  crew  on  shore,  and  sailed  away. 
After  all  these  casualties  it  was  impossible  to  man  the  whole  fleet. 
Accordingly,  Gilbert  left  the  Swallow  to  take  the  sick  home,  and 
with  the  rest  of  the  fleet  pursued  his  exploration  of  the  coast 
southward.  On  the  20th  of  August  they  set  sail,  supplied  with 
food  and  all  other  necessaries  for  the  voyage,  "  as  well  as  if  they 
had  been  in  a  country  or  some  city  populous  and  plentiful  of  all 
things  "  ;  a  statement  which  gives  us  some  idea  of  the  importance 
to  which  the  Newfoundland  fisheries  had  attained.  On  the  27th 
of  August  they  met  with  the  worst  mishap  that  had  yet  befallen 
the  fleet.  The  Delight,  the  only  ship,  since  the  desertion  of  the 
Raleigh,  of  more  than  forty  tons  burden,  with  most  of  the  pro- 
visions on  board,  struck  on  a  rock  and  went  to  pieces  in  full  view 
of  the  other  ships.  Among  those  who  perished  was  the  Saxon 
miner.  Another  victim,  through  his  own  heroism  in  refusing  to 
leave  the  vessel  till  the  last,  was  Maurice  Brown,  who  had  been 
the  captain  of  the  Swallow,  and  the  unwilling  witness  to  the  mis- 
conduct of  her  crew.  The  silver  ore,  too,  was  all  lost,  a  disaster 
which  seems  to  have  troubled  Gilbert  more  than  anything  which 
occurred  in  the  whole  voyage.  Only  sixteen  men  got  off  in  a 
pinnace,  without  any  food  or  water.  Their  adventures  were  re- 
markable even  among  the  romantic  incidents  which  are  sown  so 
thickly  among  the  naval  annals  of  that  age.  They  at  length 
reached  the  shore  of  Newfoundland.  Thence,  by  the  friendship 
of  a  Portuguese  captain,  they  were  safely  landed  on  the  coast  of 
Spain,  and  in  spite  of  the  hostile  vigilance  of  the  Spanish  gov- 
ernment, made  their  way  safely  through  France  to  England. 

More  disasters  were  in  store  for  the  fleet.  The  weather  be- 
came daily  worse  and  the  sea  more  dangerous.  Food  and  cloth- 
Giibert's  mS>  °f  wmcn  the  chief  supplies  had  been  in  the  De- 
aeath.  light,  ran  short.  At  length  Gilbert,  unwillingly  as  it 
would  seem,  gave  up  all  idea  of  further  exploration,  and  on  the 
31st  of  August  set   sail   homeward,  consoling  himself  and  his 


r2      AMERICAN  DISCO  VERY  DURING  Jfrlth  CENTUR  V. 

crew  with  the  prospect  of  a  better  furnished  expedition  next 
spring.  There  is  no  need  to  dwell  at  length  on  so  well-known  a 
story  as  the  end  of  that  voyage,  told  by  Hayes  with  all  the 
simple  dignity  of  true  sorrow.  Daring  even  to  rashness,  Gilbert 
would  not  be  turned  aside  from  his  resolve  to  sail  in  the  Squirrel, 
the  smallest  vessel  in  the  fleet,  though  she  was  evidently  over- 
loaded. To  the  remonstrances  of  the  captain  and  master  of  the 
Golden  Hind,  and  those  of  his  other  friends,  he  only  answered 
that  he  would  not  forsake  his  little,  company  going  homeward, 
with  whom  he  had  passed  so  many  storms  and  perils.  At  twelve 
o'clock  on  a  September  night  his  lights  disappeared,  and  the 
father  of  English  colonization  went  to  his  rest.  His  last  words 
were,  "We  are  as  near  heaven  by  sea  as  by  land,"  "a  speech 
well  becoming  a  soldier  resolute  in  Jesus  Christ." 

Two  documents  written  in  the  year  of  Gilbert's  ill-fated  at- 
tempt throw  so  much  light  on  the  views  and  hopes  of  colo- 
Peekham's  nizers  m  that  age  that  we  must  not  leave  them  unno- 
oS'weJtern  ^ce^-  One  *s  a  paper  by  Sir  George  Peckham,  a  man 
Planting.^  whose  name  we  meet  with  more  than  once  as  promot- 
ing voyages  to  distant  parts.  The  pamphlet  is  interesting  as 
showing  the  various  impulses  which  were  urging  the  stream  of 
English  enterprise  towards  the  New  World.  It  also  serves  to  illus- 
trate the  many  meeting-points  between  the  great  intellectual  and 
material  discoveries  of  that  age,  the  revolution  in  the  world  of 
thought  and  the  unveiling  of  a  new  continent.  Peckham  at  the 
outset  dwells  on  the  rapidity  and  splendor  of  the  Spanish  con- 
quest, and  points  out  how  the  results  achieved  had  gone  far 
beyond  those  hopes  which,  when  Columbus  first  avowed  them, 
"  were  accounted  a  fantastical  imagination  and  a  drowsy  dream." 
He  then  appeals  to  those  principles  of  international  law  that  were 
just  dimly  emerging  out  <*f  that  chaos  which  the  wreck  of  the 
feudal  and  imperial  systems  and  the  change  in  the  position  of  the 
Papacy  had  left  behind  them.  "The  Christians,"  he  says,  in  lan- 
guage which  a  century  before  would  to  most  of  his  countrymen 
have  seemed  meaningless,  "  may  lawfully  travel  into  those  coun- 

1  The  pamphlet  is  published  in  Hakluyt,  iii.  208.  It  is  entitled  ''A  true  Report  of  the  late 
discoveries  and  possession  taken  in  the  right  of  the  Crown  of  England  of  the  Newfoundlands 
i  by  that  valiant  and  worthy  gentleman,  Sir  Humphry  Gilbert,  Knight.  Wherein  is  also 
briefly  set  down,  her  highness'  lawful  title  thereunto  and  the  great  and  manifold  commodities 
■  that  are  like  to  grow  thereby  to  the  whole  Realme  in  general,  and  to  the  adventurers  in  par- 
•  ticular.  Together  with  the  easiness  and  shortness  of  the  voyage.  Written  by  Sir  George 
iPeckham,  Knight,  the  chief  adventurer  and  furtherer  of  Sir  Humphrey  Gilbert's  voyage  to 
Newfoundland. " 


ARGUMENTS  FOR  COLONIZATION.  53 

tries  and  abide  there,  whom  the  savages  may  not  justly  impugn 
and  forbid  in  respect  of  the  mutual  society  and  fellowship  between 
man  and  man  prescribed  by  the  Law  of  Nations."1  If  the  / 
natives  should  willingly  assent  to  our  settlement,  even  the  sem-V 
blance  of  hostility  must  be  avoided.  One  cannot  but  think  that 
the  dealings  of  Cortez  with  the  Tlascalans  were  present  to  Peck- 
ham  when  he  suggests  that  the  protection  of  the  savages  from 
their  cannibal  foes  may  be  made  a  groundwork  for  alliance  and 
friendship.  If,  however,  gentle  means  should  fail,  and  the 
natives  should  treat  the  settlers  as  enemies,  all  sacred  and  pro- 
fane history  from  the  time  of  Joshua  downward  will  justify  an 
armed  occupation.  Descending  to  modern  precedents  and  argu- 
ments specially  applicable  to  the  case  of  America,  Peckham 
brings  forward  the  conquest  by  Madoc,  and  rests  a  somewhat 
better  claim  on  the  discoveries  of  Cabot.  To  us  in  the  present^-" 
day  all  this  seems  little  more  than  a  formal  preamble.  To  the 
men  of  that  age,  bewildered  by  the  need  for  applying  old  ideas 
and  principles  to  new  circumstances,  and  still  in  bondage  to  the 
mediaeval  reverence  for  magnificent  theories,  a  reverence  scarcely 
impaired  by  the  inapplicability  of  those  theories  when  translated 
into  practice,  such  arguments  as  these  doubtless  carried  real 
weight.  The  latter  part  of  Peckham's  address,  in  which  he  speaks 
not  as  a  publicist,  but  as  an  English  trader  and  missionary,  is 
more  closely  connected  with  our  subject.  The  gain  to  be  looked 
for  from  the  plantation  is  threefold,  and  will  accrue  to  the  realmrf 
at  large,  to  individual  adventurers,  and  to  the  natives.  By  estab- 
lishing a  safe  harbor  and  head-quarters  more  English  vessels 
would  be  brought  to  the  Newfoundland  fisheries.  By  this  means 
and  the  encouragement  which  it  would  give  to  trade,  the  settle^ 
ment  .would  increase  and  maintain  "the  greatest  jewel  of  the 
realm,  the  chiefest  strength  and  force  of  the  same  for  offense  and 
defense  in  marshall  matter  and  manner,  the  multitude  of  ships, 
masters,  and  mariners."  Moreover,  it  might  reasonably  be 
hoped  that  a  demand  would  spring  up  among  the  natives  for 
woolen  and  other  wares  whereby  the  alarming  glut  of  labor  at  y 
home  might  be  relieved.  To  each  class  of  adventurers  he  holds 
out  special  allurements.  Noblemen  and  gentlemen  would  find 
all  the  resources  of  country  life,  whether  for  pleasure  or  profit. 

1  One  odd  bit  of  history  finds  it  way  in  here.  Peckham  appeals  to  the  example  not  only  of 
Theodosius  but  of  his  sons  Honorius  and  Arcadius,  who  "with  all  stout  godliness  most 
carefully  imitated  the  foresteps  of  their  father." 


i 


54      AMERICAN  DISCO  VER  V  D  URING  XVI ih  CENTUR  Y. 

The  huntsman,  the  falconer,  the  farmer  would  all  have  full  scope 
for  their  pursuits.  Beside  fish,  which  apparently  he  reckons  the 
chief  commodity  to  be  looked  for,  the  country  would  supply  tim- 
ber, furs,  hides,  and  numberless  other  products.  In  this  quest 
for  gain  higher  objects  are  not  to  be  forgotten.  The  savages  are 
to  be  "  brought  from  falsehood  to  truth,  from  darkness  to  light, 
from  the  highway  of  death  to  the  path  of  life,  from  superstitious 
idolatry  to  sincere  Christianity,  from  the  devil  to  Christ,  from 
hell  to  heaven."  Nor  were  they  to  be  left  without  a  share  in  the 
temporal  gains  accruing  from  the  settlement.  "  Beside  the  knowl- 
edge how  to  till  and  dress  their  ground,  they  shall  be  reduced 
from  unseemly  customs  to  honest  manners,  from  disordered,  riot- 
ous routs  and  companies  to  a  well-governed  commonwealth,  and 
withal  shall  be  taught  mechanical  occupations,  arts,  and  liberal 
sciences."  After  enumerating  all  the  advantages  which  are  to  be 
expected,  Peckham  considers  the  means  by  which  the  scheme  may 
be  carried  out,  and  meets  various  objections  which  may  be  brought 
against  it.  Here,  at  the  very  outset  of  American  colonization, 
we  meet  with  an  error  which,  as  we  shall  hereafter  see,  beset  it 
throughout  its  whole  course.  There  are,  Peckham  says,  "  great 
numbers  which  live  in  such  penury  and  want  as  they  could  be 
contented  to  hazard  their  lives  and  to  serve  one  year  for  meat, 
drink,  and  apparel  only,  without  wages,  in  hope  thereby  to  amend 
their  estates."  Gilbert's  voyage  showed  how  ill-fitted  such  men 
were,  even  for  the  task  of  exploring,  much  more  for  that  of  found- 
ing an  infant  state,  and  the  whole  history  of  English  colonization 
in  America  was  destined  to  confirm  the  lesson.  From  first  to 
last,  from  the  failure  of  Gilbert  on  the  shores  of  Newfoundland, 
down  to  the  day  when  Oglethorpe  led  his  band  of  bankrupts 
and  paupers  to  the  savannahs  of  Georgia,  the  tendency  to  look 
on  colonization  as  a  refuge  for  the  impoverished  and  incapable, 
was  one  of  the  chief  drawbacks  to  the  success  of  our  American 
settlements. 

Another  document  of  the  same  kind,  possibly  earlier  in  date, 
is  a  letter  addressed  to  the  merchants  of  the  Moscow  Company, 
cariiie's  designed  to  set  forth  the  immediate  commercial  gain 
scheme.  likely  to  accrue  from  Gilbert's  voyage.1  The  writer, 
Carlile,   was  the  son-in-law  of  Walsingham.2     That  statesman's 


1  Cariiie's  letter  is  published  in  Hakluyi:,  iii.  228. 

a  Aldworth,  the  Mayor  of  Bristol,  in  writing  to  Walshingham,  calls  Carlile  his  (Walsing- 
ham's)  son-in-law.     The  letter  is  in  Hakluyt,  iii.  228. 


CARLIL&S  SCHEME. 


55 


more  distinguished  son-in-law,  Sidney,  had  already  shown  an 
interest  in  the  projects  of,  Gilbert,1  possibly  even  a  desire  to  antic- 
ipate them  ;  and  Walsingham  himself  had  thought  it  worth  while 
to  send  emissaries  to  spy  out  the  state  of  the  Spanish  colonies. 
The  combined  action  of  Carlile,  Sidney,  and  Walsingham  reminds 
us  how  American  discovery  had  become  the  meeting-point 
of  the  trader,  the  knight-errant,  and  the  statesman. 

Carlile's  letter  dwells  mainly  on  arguments  likely  *o  appeal  to 
merchants.  Russian  trade  is  so  hindered  by  the  jealousy  of  the 
Dutch,  the  Danes,  and  the  Easterlings,  that  it  is  "fallen  to  very 
ticklish  terms  and  to  as  slender  likelihood  of  any  further  goodness 
as  any  other  trade  that  may  be  named."  Piracy  and  religious 
commotions  interfered  with  the  trade  to  the  Mediterranean  and 
the  Levant.  None  of  these  objections  could  be  brought  against 
the  American  voyage.  Unlike  that  to  Russia,  it  might  be  made 
at  any  season  of  the  year.  The  coasts  of  England  and  Ireland 
abounded  with  suitable  harbors,  and  the  voyage  itself  was  easy 
and  free  from  danger.  Merchants  might  send  their  sons,  their 
factors,  and  their  servants  without  any  fear  of  the  seductions  of 
popery.  His  enumeration  of  the  commodities  to  be  looked  for 
is  nearly  the  same  as  that  given  by  Peckham.  They  agree,  too, 
as  to  the  class  from  which  the  settlement  may  be  recruited.  His 
language  on  this  point  deserves  to  be  quoted,  summing  up  as  it 
does  the  motives  which  for  the  next  thirty  years  offered  the  main 
incentives  to  colonization : 

"  Who  knoweth  not  how,  by  the  long  peace,  happy  health,  and  blessed 
plentifulness  wherewith  God  hath  endued  this  realm,  that  the  people  is  so 
mightily  increased;  as  a  great  number,  being  brought  up  during  their  youth 
in  their  fathers'  houses,  without  any  instruction  how  to  get  their  living  after 
their  parents'  decease,  are  driven  to  some  necessity  whereby  very  often,  for 
want  of  better  education,  they  fall  into  sundry  disorders  ;  and  so  the  good 
sort  of  people,  as  I  said  before,  are  by  them  ordinarily  troubled  and  led  on 
to  one  shameful  end  or  other,  whereas  if  there  might  be  found  some  such 
fund  of  employment  as  this  there  would  be  no  doubt  but  that  a  great  part 
of  them  would  be  withheld  from  falling  into  such  vile  deeds,  and  instead 
thereof  prove  greatly  serviceable  in  those  affairs  where  they  might  be  so 
employed.  I  speak  of  mine  own  experience,  having  seen  divers  come  over 
to  the  wars  of  the  Low  Countries,  during  my  residence  in  the  same,  who  had 
been  very  evil  livers,  and  by  some  little  continuance  with  us  have  grown  to 
be  very  industrious  in  their  faculty." 

The  experience  of  Virginia  thirty  years  later  showed  that  the 
same  principles  cannot  be  applied  to  a  camp  and  a  civil  settle- 

1  Bourn's  Life  of  Sidney,  p.  376. 


56 


AMERICAN  DISCO  VER  Y  D  URING  XVIth  CENTUR  V. 


ment.  These  representations  so  far  worked  upon  the  Moscow 
Company  that  they  appointed  a  committee  to  confer  with  Carlile.1 
The  result  of  the  conference  was  embodied  in  a  definite  scheme. 
It  was  proposed  that  a  hundred  men  should  be  settled  for  a  year, 
to  study  the  manners  of  the  people  and  the  best  means  of  trade. 
A  patent  was  to  be  obtained  from  the  queen,  giving  the  advent- 
urers the  right  over  all  land  which  they  might  occupy,  with  the 
sole  reservation  of  one-fifth  of  all  precious  metals  discovered. 
The  proceeds  of  the  adventure  were  to  be  equally  divided  among 
those  who  should  embark  capital  and  the  actual  partakers  in  the 
voyage.  The  patent  was  to  empower  the  holders  to  export  set- 
tlers as  they  should  think  fit,  and  was  to  grant  them  a  full  mo- 
nopoly of  trade,  and  to  restrict  all  other  subjects  of  the  queen 
from  settling  within  a  hundred  leagues  of  the  place  where  the 
plantation  should  be  placed.  This  scheme,  which  may  be  looked 
upon  as  faintly  foreshadowing  the  proceedings  of  the  Virginia 
Company,  does  not  seem  to  have  borne  any  fruit.  It  is  not  un- 
likely that  the  projectors  of  it  were  discouraged  by  the  disastrous 
end  of  Gilbert's  attempt. 

The  task  in  which  Gilbert  had  failed  was  to  be  undertaken  by 
one  better  qualified  to  carry  it  out.  If  any  Englishman  in  that 
Voyage  of  age  seemed  to  be  marked  out  as  the  founder  of  a  colo- 
Amidas.  nial  empire,  it  was  Raleigh.  Like  Gilbert,  he  had 
studied  books;  like  Drake,  he  could  rule  men.  The  pupil  of 
Coligny,  the  friend  of  Spenser,  traveler,  soldier,  scholar,  courtier, 
statesman,  Raleigh,  with  all  his  varied  graces  and  powers  rises 
before  us,  the  type  and  personification  of  the  age  in  which  he 
lived.-  The  associations  of  his  youth,  and  the  training  of  his  early 
manhood,  fitted  him  to  sympathize  with  the  aims  of  his  half- 
brother  Gilbert,  and  there  is  little  reason  to  doubt  that  Raleigh 
had  a  share  in  his  undertaking  and  his  failure. 

In  1584  he  obtained  a  patent  precisely  similar  to  Gilbert's.3 
His  first  step  showed  the  thoughtful  and  well-planned  system  on 
which  he  began  his  task.  Two  ships  were  sent  out,  not  with  any 
idea  of  settlement,  but  to  examine  and  report  upon  the  country.3 
Their  commanders  were  Arthur  Barlow  and  Philip  Amidas.  To 
the  former  we  owe  the  extant  record  of  the  voyage  :  the  name  of 

1  The  proceedings  of  the  committee  are  embodied  in  a  report,  epitomized  by  Mr.  Sainsbury 
in  his  calendar  of  Colonial  Papers,  1574-1660.  The  reference  to  Colonial  Papers  will  apply 
to  this  series.     The  East  India  Papers  will  ue  referred  to  by  that  title. 

1  Hakluyt,  iii.  297. 

8  Barlow's  account  of  the  voyage.     lb.  iii.  301. 


VOYAGE  OF  A  MIDAS  AND  BARLOW.  ^ 

the  latter  would  suggest  that  he  was  a  foreigner.  Whether  by 
chance  or  design,  they  took  a  more  southerly  course  than  any  of 
their  predecessors.  On  the  2d  of  July,  the  presence  of  shallow 
water,  and  a  smell  of  sweet  flowers  warned  them  that  land  was 
near.  The  promise  thus  given  was  amply  fulfilled  upon  their  ap- 
proach. The  sight  before  them  was  far  different  from  that  which 
met  the  eyes  of  Hore  and  Gilbert.  Instead  of  the  bleak  coast 
of  Newfoundland,  Barlow  and  Amidas  looked  upon  a  scene  which 
might  recall  the  softness  of  the  Mediterranean,  and  almost  rival 
the  tropical  splendor  which  had  revealed  itself  to  the  gaze  of 
Columbus.  The  waters  swarmed  with  fish,  and  the  woods  and 
meadows  with  game,  while  the  fertility  of  the  wild  grapes  seemed 
to  outdo  the  vineyards  of  the  Old  World.  Coasting  along  for 
about  a  hundred  and  twenty  miles  the  voyagers  reached  an  inlet, 
and  with  some  difficulty  entered.  They  then  solemnly  took  pos- 
session of  the  land  in  the  queen's  name,  and  then  delivered  it 
over  to  Raleigh  according  to  his  patent.  They  soon  discovered 
that  the  land  upon  which  they  had  touched  was  an  island  about 
twenty  miles  long  and  not  above  six  broad,  named,  as  they  after- 
wards learned,  Roanoke.  Beyond,  separating  them  from  the 
mainland,  lay  an  inclosed  sea,  studded  with  more  than  a  hun- 
dred fertile  and  well-wooded  islets.  For  two  days  none  of  the 
natives  appeared,  but  on  the  third,  three  of  them  in  a  canoe 
made  for  the  shore  of  the  island  and  landed.  Thereupon  Barlow 
and  Amidas  rowed  ashore.  One  of  the  natives  addressed  them 
fearlessly,  and  of  his  own  accord  accompanied  the  strangers  to 
their  ship.  There  he  was  hospitably  treated,  and  received  some 
small  presents  at  his  departure;  a  kindness  which  he  speedily 
repaid  by  returning  with  a  plentiful  supply  of  fish  for  both  ves- 
sels. Next  day  a  fleet  of  canoes  appeared  with  some  forty  or 
fifty  natives.  The  English  admired  their  stature  and  form,  and 
found  them  in  their  behaviour  "  as  mannerly  and  civil  as  any  in 
Europe."  Among  them  was  Granganimeo,  the  king's  brother. 
After  they  had  landed,  his  servants  spread  mats,  upon  one  of 
which  he  seated  himself,  with  four  of  his  counselors  on  the  other, 
and  his  men  standing  round  at  a  little  distance.  Upon  the  ap- 
proach of  the  English,  weapons  in  hand,  Granganimeo  showed 
no  fear,  but  received  them  with  every  mark  of  friendship.  He 
explained  that  his  brother  was  unable  to  come,  having  been 
wounded  in  a  recent  fight.  The  English  then  gave  suitable  pres- 
ents to  Granganimeo,  and  would  have  also  given  something  to 


58     AMERICAN  DISCO  VER  V  D  URING  X  Vlth  CENTUR  Y. 

the  four  chief  men,  but  the  prince  asserted  the  royal  prerogative 
in  a  primitive  form  by  taking  all  the  gifts  and  putting  them  into 
his  own  basket,  showing  at  the  same  time  by  signs  that  all  the 
liberality  of  the  strangers  must  be  reserved  for  him.  In  a  day  or 
two  traffic  began.  A  tin  dish,  which  Granganimeo  forthwith 
converted  into  a  shield,  sold  for  twenty  skins,  and  a  copper  kettle, 
which  probably  did  duty  in  the  next  skirmish  as  a  helmet,  for 
fifty.  Everything  which  could  serve  as  a  weapon  had  special  at- 
tractions for  the  savages.  Hatchets,  axes,  and  knives  were  all 
desired  objects,  and  they  would  have  given  anything  for  swords, 
which  the  English  prudently  refused  to  sell.  This  precaution, 
however,  neither  showed  nor  produced  any  want  of  confidence 
on  either  side.  In  a  few  days  Granganimeo's  wife  appeared,  with 
a  train  of  forty  or  fifty  women.  Encouraged  by  the  courtesy  and 
kindness  of  the  natives,  Barlow  and  seven  others  landed  on  the 
island  of  Roanoke,  where,  in  the  absence  of  Granganimeo,  they 
were  received  by  his  wife.  In  Barlow's  own  words,  "  they  were 
entertained  with  all  love  and  kindness,  and  with  as  much  bountie 
(after  their  manner)  as  they  possibly  could  devise."  When  by 
chance  some  hunters  entered  the  village,  bows  in  hand,  and  the 
English  for  a  moment  showed  a  suspicion  of  treachery,  their  hostess 
at  once  disarmed  her  countrymen  and  drove  them  out  of  the  vil- 
lage. The  faintest  symptom  of  distrust  seemed  to  pain  these 
kindly  and  hospitable  savages.  When  the  English  refused  to 
stay  all  night,  the  queen,  though  grieved  at  their  departure,  sent 
a  guard  to  watch  on  shore  by  their  boats,  and  supplied  her  guests 
with  supper  and  bedding.  Nor  did  the  natives  only  show  the 
savage  virtue  of  hospitality.  Granganimeo  was  true  to  his  word 
and  unfailing  in  the  punctuality  of  his  payments.  Altogether 
Barlow  might  well  say,  "  We  found  the  people  most  gentle,  lov- 
ing, and  faithful,  void  of  all  guile  and  treason,  and  such  as  live 
after  the  manner  of  the  golden  age."  The  historian  who  has  be- 
fore him  so  many  gloomy  and  shameful  incidents  in  the  common 
history  of  the  two  races,  may  be  forgiven  for  dwelling  at  some 
length  on  a  scene  where  their  intercourse  is  invested  with  so  much 
grace  and  brightness. 

The  report  which  the  voyagers  took  home  spoke  as  favorably 
of  the  land  itself  as  of  its  inhabitants.  Granganimeo  had  offered 
in  traffic  a  great  box  of  pearls,  and  the  savages  wore  ornaments 
of  copper,  if  not  of  gold.  The  woods  produced  many  commodi- 
ties, amongst  others  the  tallest  and  reddest  cedars  in  the  world. 


RALEIGH'S  FIRST  COLONY. 


59 


Even  with  the  rude  tillage  of  the  savages  the  corn  was  ready  for 
harvest  in  two  months  from  the  time  of  sowing.  Peas  put  in  by 
the  English  grew  in  ten  days  to  the  height  of  fourteen  inches. 
Should  other  resources  fail,  the  woods  offered  an  abundant  sup- 
ply of  game.  Such  was  the  glowing  account  with  which  Barlow 
and  Amidas  returned  to  England  in  the  middle  of  September. 
With  them  they  brought  two  of  the  savages,  named  Wanchese 
and  Manteo.  A  probable  tradition  tells  us  that  the  queen  herself 
named  the  country  Virginia,  and  that  Raleigh's  knighthood  was 
the  reward  and  acknowledgment  of  his  success.1 

On  the  strength  of  this  report  Raleigh  at  once  made  prepara- 
tions for  a  settlement.  A  fleet  of  seven  ships  was  provided  for 
Raleigh's  the  conveyance  of  a  hundred  and  eight  settlers.  The 
colony .2  fleet  was  under  the  command  of  Sir  Richard  Grenville, 
who  was  to  establish  the  settlement  and  leave  it  under  the  charge 
of  Ralph  Lane.  It  is  easy  to  be  wise  after  the  event,  yet  it 
would  almost  seem  as  if  in  the  selection  of  commanders,  Raleigh 
showed  less  discretion  than  might  have  been  expected  from  him. 
For  Grenville's  courage  and  capacity  it  is  enough  to  say  that  in 
in  the  age  of  Drake  and  Hawkins  he  stood  in  the  first  rank  of 
English  heroes.  Events,  however,  soon  showed  that  the  task  in 
hand  needed  something  more  than  a  brave  and  accomplished 
sea-captain.  Lane  was  a  well-born  adventurer;  one  of  those 
men  of  restless  temper,  versatile  powers,  and  changeful  career,  of 
whom  that  age  was  so  fruitful.  He  had  served  in  the  royal  army 
during  the  great  rising  of  the  North  in  1569.  He  had  offered  to 
raise  an  English  contingent  for  the  Spanish  king  against  the 
Turk.  Failing  that,  he  had  offered  to  serve  the  King  of  Fez 
against  the  Spaniard.  If  he  might  not  serve  under  the  banner 
either  of  Rome  or  Islam,  he  was  willing  to  fight  for  the  Protestant 
faith  under  the  Prince  of  Orange.  In  the  matter  of  civil  employ- 
ment his  tastes  and  capacities  seem  to  have  been  equally  catholic. 

1  Prince's  Worthies  of  Devon  (ed,  1810),  669.  It  seems  impossible  to  ascertain  the  exact 
date  of  Raleigh's  knighthood.  He  is  first  called  Sir  Walter  by  the  Commons'  Journals  for 
the  24th  of  February,  1584-5. 

2  The  materials  for  the  history  of  Raleigh's  first  colony  are  very  ample.  They  are,  1.  A 
diary  by  one  of  those  who  sailed  and  returned  with  Grenville.  2.  An  account  of  the  doings 
of  the  colony  addressed  by  Lane  to  Raleigh.  3.  An  account  by  one  of  the  settlers,  Thomas 
Heriot,  an  educated  and  scientific  man.  4.  A  letter  from  Lane  to  Richard  Hakluyt  of  the 
Middle  Temple,  a  cousin  of  the  more  famous  Hakluyt.  These  are  all  published  in  Hakluyt's 
third  volume.  In  addition  to  these,  there  are  published  in  the  fourth  volume  of  the  Arcfueo- 
logia  A  mericaita  some  original  letters  written  by  Lane  from  Virginia,  and  a  short  sketch  of 
his  life,  very  carefully  worked  out  by  Mr.  Hale,  who  seems  to  have  exhausted  all  the  availa- 
ble materials  on  the  subject. 


60     AMERICAN  DISCOVERY  DURING  XVIth  CENTURY. 

In  scarcely  a  document  does  his  name  appear  in  which  he  is  not 
an  applicant  for  some  office  under  the  Crown.  At  one  time  he  is 
an  equerry  at  court,  and  a  hanger-on  to  Leicester.  Then  he 
holds  what  would  now  be  a  post  in  the  Customs  office.  That 
he  was  a  brave  and  skillful  soldier  may  be  inferred,  not  only  from 
the  whole  tenor  of  his  conduct  in  Virginia,  but  from  the  fact  that 
seven  years  later,  at  a  council  of  war  held  before  the  sailing  of 
the  Armada,  he  was  the  only  man  present  of  a  lower  rank  than 
that  of  knight.  But  the  courage  and  capacity  of  a  soldier  is  only 
one  of  the  qualities  needed  for  the  government  of  a  new  settle- 
ment, and  when  coupled  with  such  tastes  and  such  a  character 
as  Lane's  career  indicates,  mere  courage  is  more  likely  to  do  harm 
than  good.  As  might  have  been  expected,  Lane  engaged  the 
colony  in  enterprises  for  which  it  was  wholly  unfitted,  and  which 
ultimately  proved  fatal  to  its  very  existence.  The  character  of 
the  colonists  was  not  altogether  such  as  to  make  amends  for  any 
shortcomings  in  their  leaders.  Many,  according  to  the  descrip- 
tion of  one  of  the  voyagers,  "  after  gold  and  silver  was  not  so 
soon  found  as  it  was  by  them  looked  for,  had  little  or  no  care  of 
any  other  thing  but  to  pamper  their  bellies."  Many  "  had  little 
understanding,  less  discretion,  and  more  tongue  than  was  needful 
or  requisite.  Some  also  were  of  a  nice  bringing  up,  only  in  cities 
or  towns,  or  such  as  never,  I  may  say,  had  seen  the  world  before. 
Because  there  were  not  to  be  found  any  English  cities,  nor  such 
fair  houses,  nor  at  their  own  wish  any  of  their  accustomed  dainty 
food,  nor  any  soft  beds  of  down  or  feathers,  the  country  was  to 
them  miserable,  and  their  reports  thereof  according." 

On  the  9th  of  April  the  emigrants  set  sail.  On  the  13th  of 
May  they  touched  at  the  island  of  St.  John,  in  the  West  Indies. 
There  they  established  a  fortified  camp,  and  remained  for  seven- 
teen days,  laying  in  stores.  During  this  time  an  event  occurred 
which  seems  to  have  alienated  Lane  and  Grenville,  and  so  to 
have  had  an  injurious  effect  on  the  fortunes  of  the  settlement. 
Grenville,  according  to  Lane's  account,  sent  him  to  get  a  supply 
of  salt,  assuring  him  that  as  there  was  no  fear  of  being  molested 
by  the  Spaniards,  twenty-five  men  would  be  a  sufficient  force. 
Contrary  to  expectation,  the  Spaniards  appeared  with  forty  horse 
and  three  hundred  foot.  No  immediate  mischief  seems  to  have 
ensued,  but  it  is  clear  from  a  letter  written  by  Lane  long  after, 
that  he  felt  aggrieved,  and  it  seems  probable  that  his  distrust  of 
Grenville  was  one  of  the  causes  which  brought  the  colony  to  a 


FIRS T  COLONY  AT  ROA NOKE.  6 1 

disastrous  end.1  On  the  5th  of  June  the  colony  touched  at  His- 
paniola,  and  were  most  courteously  received  and  entertained  by 
the  Spaniards.  The  "  wiser  sort,"  however,  among  the  English, 
recalled  the  fate  cf  Oxenham,  and  the  reception  of  Hawkins  at 
Ulloa,  and  "  did  impute  this  great  show  of  friendship  and  courtesy 
used  towards  us  by  the  Spaniards,  rather  to  the  force  that  we 
were  of,  and  the  vigilancy  and  watchfulness  that  was  amongst  us, 
than  to  hearty  good- will  or  more  friendly  entertainment."2  The 
spectacle  of  the  growing  riches  and  prosperity  of  the  settlements 
in  the  West  Indies  evidently  made  a  deep  impression  on  Lane, 
and  suggested  to  him  a  vulnerable  spot  in  the  Spanish  empire.3 
On  the  20th  of  June  the  fleet  reached  the  coast  of  Florida,  and 
three  days  later  narrowly  escaped  being  cast  away  off  Cape  Fear. 
In  a  few  days  more  they  anchored  at  Wococon,  an  island  near 
Roanoke.  In  entering  the  harbor,  the  largest  ship,  the  Tiger, 
struck  on  a  sand-bar,  and  was  nearly  lost,  either  through  the 
clumsiness  or  treachery  of  the  pilot,  Simon  Fernando,  a  Portu- 
guese.4 On  the  nth  of  July  Grenville,  with  forty  others,  includ- 
ing Lane,  Amidas,  and  the  chief  men  of  the  expedition,  crossed 
over  to  the  •  mainland.  Taking  a  northerly  direction,  they  ex- 
plored the  coast  as  far  as  Secotan,  an  Indian  town  some  sixty 
miles  south  of  Roanoke,  where  they  were  hospitably  received 
by  the  savages.  It  is  melancholy,  after  the  bright  picture  of  the 
intercourse  between  the  natives  and  the  English  drawn  by  Bar- 
low, to  have  to  record  hostilities,  in  which  by  far  the  greater  share 

1  In  a  letter  written  by  Lane  to  Walsingham  from  Virginia,  and  sent  back  by  the  fleet,  we 
find  him  complaining  that  their  arrival  had  been  delayed  "wholly  through  the  fault  of  him 
that  intendeth  to  accuse  others."  Writing  somewhat  later  to  Walsingham  he  speaks  more 
plainly.  "  Sir  R.  Greenfeelde  (sic)  general  hath  demeaned  himself  from  the  first  day  of  his 
entry  into  government  at  Plymouth,  until  the  day  of  departure  from  hence  over  the  bar,  in  the 
Port  Fernando,  far  otherwise  than  my  hope  of  him  .  .  .  and  particular  how  tyrannous  an 
execution  without  any  occasion  of  my  part  offered,  he  not  only  purposed,  but  even  pro- 
pounded the  same  to  have  brought  me  by  indirect  means  and  the  most  untrue  surmises  to  the 
question  for  my  life."  Here  as  elsewhere  I  have  modernized  the  spelling,  which  in  Lane's 
case  is  not  only  antique  but  bad.  In  the  two  documents  published  by  Hakluyt  it  has  evi- 
dently been  corrected. 

2  Hakluyt,  iii.  309. 

3  Thus  we  find  him  writing  to  Sidney  in  a  letter  sent  back  by  Grenville's  fleet  "  If  her 
Majesty  shall  at  any  time  find  herself  burdened  with  the  King  of  Spain,  we  have,  by  our 
dwelling  upon  the  island  of  St.  John  and  Hispaniola  for  the  space  of  five  weeks,  discovered 
the  forces  thereof  with  the  infinite  riches  of  the  same,  as  that  I  find  it  an  attempt  most  honor- 
able, feasible  and  profitable,  and  only  fit  for  yourself  to  be  chief  commander  in.  This  entry 
would  so  gall  the  King  of  Spain  as  it  would  divert  his  forces  that  he  troubleth  these  parts  of 
Christendom  with,  into  those  parts  where  he  cannot  greatly  annoy  us  with  them." 

*  This  is  the  account  given  by  the  anonymous  writer  in  Hakluyt.  Lane,  on  the  other  hand, 
in  a  letter  to  Walsingham,  praises  the  conduct  of  Fernando  highly.  But  it  is  clear  that  in 
White's  expedition  two  years  later  he  dealt  treacherously  with  the  English. 


..-■ c  .  ,«C5 


6z     AMERICAN  DISCOVERY  DURING  XVIth  CENTURY. 

of  blame  lay  with  our  countrymen.  On  the  voyage  back  to 
Roanoke  a  silver  cup  was  stolen  from  the  English  at  one  of  the 
Indian  villages.  In  revenge  the  English  put  the  inhabitants  to 
flight,  burned  the  village  and  destroyed  the  crops.  On  the  3d  of 
August  one  ship  sailed  home,  and  on  the  25th  Grenville  left  the 
colony,  followed,  as  it  would  seem,  during  the  course  of  the  next 
month  by  the  rest  of  the  fleet.1  The  accounts  of  the  country  sent 
home  by  Lane  fully  confirmed  the  praises  given  to  it  by  Barlow 
and  Amidas.  "  It  is  the  goodliest  and  most  pleasing  territory  of 
the  world ;  for  the  continent  is  of  an  huge  and  unknown  great- 
ness, and  very  well  peopled  and  towned,  though  savagely,  and 
the  climate  so  wholesome  that  we  had  not  one  sick  since  we 
touched  the  land  here.  To  conclude,  if  Virginia  had  but  horses 
and  kine  in  some  reasonable  proportion,  I  dare  assure  myself, 
being  inhabited  with  English,  no  realm  in  Christendom  were 
comparable  to  it.  The  people  naturally  are  most  courteous,  and 
very  desirous  to  have  clothes,  but  especially  of  coarse  cloth  rather 
than  silk ;  coarse  canvas,  they  also  like  well  of,  but  copper  car- 
rieth  the  price  of  all,  so  it  be  made  red.  All  the  kingdoms  and 
states  of  Christendom,  their  commodities  joined  in  one  together, 
do  not  yield  more  good  or  plentiful  whatsoever  for  public  use  is 
needful  or  pleasing  for  delight."  The  colonists  had  not  found 
one  stinking  weed  in  the  whole  country.  Lane  professed  him- 
self "  better  contented  to  live  with  fish  for  his  daily  food  and 
water  for  his  daily  drink  in  the  prosecution  of  such  an  action, 
than  out  of  the  same  to  live  on  the  greatest  plenty  that  the  court 
could  give  him,"  emphatic  praise,  no  doubt,  from  so  resolute  a 
place-hunter.  There  was,  however,  a  dark  side  to  the  picture. 
Lane  describes  himself  as  "  having  amongst  savages  the  charge 
of  wild  men  of  mine  own  nature,  whose  unruliness  is  such  as 
not  to  give  leisure  to  the  guards  to  be  almost  at  any  time  from 
them,"  an  account  fully  borne  out  by  the  passage  already  quoted 
from  Heriot.2 

The  site  of  the  settlement  was  at  the  northeast  corner  of  the 
island  of  Roanoke,  whence  the  settlers  could  command  the  strait. 

1  Three  of  Lane's  letters,  two  to  Walsingham  and  one  to  Sidney,  are  dated  the  12th  of 
August,  and  were  therefore  in  all  probability  sent  by  Grenville.  It  is  worth  notice,  that  in 
these  no  explicit  charge  is  brought  against  Grenville,  and  there  is  only  a  faint  allusion  to  his 
quarrel  with  Lane.  In  Lane's  third  letter  to  Walsingham,  dated  the  8th  of  September,  Gren- 
ville's  misconduct  is  denounced  at  great  length.  It  is  clear  that  as  this  letter  was  written 
after  Grenville  sailedf  at  least  one  ship  must  have  stayed  behind, 

*  Lane  to  Sidney. 


LA  NE  S  EX  PL  OR  A  TLONS.  63 

There  even  now,  choked  by  vines  and  underwood,  and  here  and 
there  broken  by  the  crumbling  remains  of  an  earthen  bastion, 
may  be  traced  the  outlines  of  the  ditch  which  inclosed  the  camp, 
some  forty  yards  square,  the  home  of  the  first  English  settlers  in 
the  New  World.1 

Of  the  doings  of  the  settlers  during  the  winter  nothing  is  re- 
corded, but  by  the  next  spring  their  prospects  looked  gloomy. 
Lane's  The  Indians  were  no  longer  friends.  Granganimeo 
tions.2  "  was  dead,  and  his  brother  Wingina,  or  as  he  was  now 
called,  Pemissapan,  was  only  withheld  by  his  father  Elsenor  from 
showing  active  hostility  to  the  English.3  The  settlers,  unable  to 
make  fishing  weirs,  and  without  seed  corn,  were  entirely  dependent 
on  the  Indians  for  their  daily  food.  Under  these  circumstances, 
one  would  have  supposed  that  Lane  would  have  best  employed  him- 
self in  guarding  the  settlement  and  improving  its  condition.  He, 
however,  thought  otherwise,  and  applied  himself  to  the  task  of 
exploring  the  neighboring  territory.  The  first  journey  of  discov- 
ery was  directed  northwards  to  the  territory  of  the  Chesepians,  a 
tribe  of  Indians  seated  on  a  small  river,  called  now  the  Eliza- 
beth, and  lying  to  the  south  of  Chesapeake  Bay.  They  found 
the  soil  fertile,  and  well  timbered  with  walnut  and  sassafras.  In 
March  the  English  undertook  the  more  formidable  task  of  ex- 
ploring inland  towards  the  west.  Sailing  up  a  broad  sheet  of 
fresh  water,  now  Albemarle  Sound,  and  along  the  river  Chowan, 
they  reached  a  tribe  of  Indians  called  the  Chowanoks.  With 
them  the  settlers  had  some  hostile  dealings,  since  Lane  states, 
though  without  any  details,  that  he  took  prisoner  their  king,  Men- 
atonon,  and  his  son.  The  former  was  impotent  in  his  limbs,  but 
"  a  very  grave  and  wise  man,  and  of  a  singular  good  discourse," 
and  well  informed  in  the  affairs  of  the  neighboring  tribes.  The 
Indian's  wisdom  and  good  discourse  were  perhaps  none  the  less 
that  they  were  certainly  not  employed  for  the  benefit  of  the 
strangers.  Lane's  idea  evidently  was  that  the  settlement  was  to 
be  merely  subordinate  to  the  discovery  of  pearl  fisheries  and 

1  A  rchteologia  A  mericana,  iv.  24. 

2  In  the  account  of  the  geograph>  of  Lane's  journeys  I  have  followed  Stith's  History  0/ 
Virginia.  The  writer  had  evidently  studied  the  chief  authorities  with  care,  and  he  knew 
the  country. 

3  This  is  a  good  instance  of  the  Virginian  mode  of  succession.  Pemissapan  is  chief,  al- 
though his  father  Elsenor  is  alive,  as  the  succession  is  through  females.  Yet  Elsenor  enjoys 
a  recognized  though  informal  position  of  influence.  We  can  see  how  this  might  develop  into 
the  ordinary  system  of  male  succession.  We  shall  meet  with  other  changes  of  name,  such 
as  that  from  Wingina  to  Pemissapan. 


64     AMERICAN  DISCOVERY  DURING  XVIth  CENTURY. 

mines,1  and  he  was  ready  to  believe  any  reports  which  held  out 
such  hopes.  Menatonon  succeeded  in  persuading  him  that  on 
the  coast  to  the  northeast,  in  the  country  of  the  Mangoaks,  near 
the  mouth  of  the  river  Moratoc,  now  the  Roanoke,  there  was  a 
pearl  fishery.  Farther  up  this  river,  the  Indian  assured  Lane,  he 
would  find  a  rich  supply  of  a  metal  called  wassador,  while  a  lit- 
tle beyond  the  head  of  the  stream  was  a  sea.  The  prospect  of  a 
pearl  fishery,  a  river  full  of  precious  metals,  and  a  passage  to  the 
South  Sea,  would  have  lured  most  adventurers  of  that  age,  and 
the  evidence  on  which  these  hopes  rested  was  at  least  as  good 
as  that  which  led  Raleigh  to  believe  in  the  golden  city  of  Manoa. 
Lane  seems  to  have  had  no  lack  of  military  skill,  and  the  plan 
of  action  which  he  now  devised  was  sound  and  well  considered. 
He  proposed  to  explore  the  Moratoc,  and  to  leave  at  intervals 
of  two  days'  march  posts  of  fifteen  or  twenty  men,  well  armed 
and  victualed,  so  as  to  keep  up  a  complete  chain  of  communi- 
cation between  the  boats  and  his  main  body.  He  would  then 
erect  a  fort  on  the  farther  sea,  and  transfer  the  colony  thither, 
as  he  already  had  been  put  to  inconvenience  by  the  insufficiency 
of  harborage  at  Roanoke.  He  first,  however,  undertook  a  pre- 
liminary voyage  of  exploration.  In  spite  of  Pemissapan's  hos- 
tility, Lane  so  far  took  him  into  his  confidence  as  to  tell  him  of 
his  projected  journey,  and  to  ask  him  for  a  guide  to  the  country 
of  the  Mangoaks.  The  Indian  used  the  knowledge  thus  gained 
to  spread  alarming  reports  about  the  English  among  the  tribes 
through  whose  territory  they  would  have  to  pass.  Through  his 
intrigues  the  supplies  of  corn  which  Lane  had  somewhat  rashly 
reckoned  on  were  not  forthcoming,  and  the  explorers  found  them- 
selves on  the  river  Moratoc,  a  hundred  and  sixty  miles  from  their 
settlement,  with  only  two  days'  food.  Upon  this  Lane  took 
counsel  with  his  followers  whether  to  go  on  or  to  retreat.  Eng- 
lishmen of  that  age  were  not  wont  to  turn  back  when  either 
honor  or  profit  lay  before  them,  and  the  decision  was  to  perse- 
vere as  long  as  the  corn  held  out.  There  were  two  mastiffs  with 
the  party,  and  to  these,  boiled  with  sassafras  leaves,  the  party  of 
forty  men  would  trust  for  their  sustenance  on  the  homeward  jour- 
ney. For  two  days  they  pushed  on.  On  the  evening  of  the 
second  day  a  horn  was  heard,  and  the  explorers  were  gladdened 

1  Lane  himself  says  in  his  report  to  Raleigh,  "  The  discovery  of  a  gold  mine,  by  the  good- 
ness of  God,  or  a  passage  to  the  South  S^a,  or  some  way  to  it,  and  nothing  else,  can  bring 
this  country  in  request  to  be  inhabited  by  our  nation."    Hakluyt,  iii.  316. 


TROUBLE  WITH  THE  INDIANS.  65 

by  what  they  believed  to  be  a  cry  of  welcome.  Manteo  had 
scarcely  dispelled  their  hopes  by  telling  them  to  expect  an  attack, 
when  his  words  were  confirmed  by  a  flight  of  arrows,  which  luck- 
ily fell  harmless.  A  sally  was  made,  but  the  savages  escaped 
under  cover  of  the  woods,  and  were  no  more  seen.  By  this  time 
the  company  had  already  "  come  to  their  dogges  porridge,"  and 
it  seemed  hopeless  to  go  farther.  The  current  fortunately  ran  so 
strong  that  their  boats  went  down  in  one  day  what  it  had  taken 
them  four  to  run  up.  Before  they  reached  the  mouth  of  the  river 
their  dogs  were  finished,  and  they  were  reduced  to  sassafras 
leaves  alone.  By  good  fortune  they  found  some  Indian  weirs, 
which  supplied  them  with  fish,  and  the  party  arrived  safe  at  Ro- 
anoke. 

Lane's  absence  had  been  a  source  of  danger  to  the  settlement. 
Pemissapan  had  spread  a  report  among  the  Indians  that  part  of 
Troubles  Lane's  band  had  been  cut  off  by  the  Indians,  and  the 
indiknsf  rest  starved  in  their  wanderings.  The  superstitious 
dread  which  the  savages  had  felt  towards  the  God  of  the  white 
men  was  for  a  time  turned  to  contempt,  and  Elsenor  could  scarce- 
ly withhold  his  countrymen  from  an  attack  on  the  settlement. 
When,  however,  Lane  reappeared  with  all  his  men  safe,  and 
bringing  with  him  Menatonon's  son  Skico,  whom  he  still  held 
prisoner,  all  the  awe  which  the  savages  had  formerly  felt  revived. 
Various  events  combined  to  strengthen  this  impression.  An 
epidemic  sickness  was  raging  through  the  country,  and  it  so 
chanced  that  it  fell  with  special  violence  on  those  villages  in 
which  any  treachery  had  been  practiced  against  the  English.1 
So  great  was  the  impression  produced  that  the  Indian  wise  men 
explained  the  deaths  as  caused  by  the  invisible  bullets  of  the 
strangers,  and  in  many  cases  the  savages  came  to  entreat  the  set- 
tlers to  use  their  mysterious  power  against  hpstile  tribes.  Relig- 
ious teaching,  when  it  seemed  to  be  enforced  by  such  outward 
marks  of  success,  was,  as  might  be  expected,  eagerly  received. 
So  great,  Heriot  tells  us,  was  their  reverence  for  the  Bible  that 
"  many  would  be  glad  to  touch  it  or  embrace  it,  to  kiss  it,  to 
hold  it  to  their  breasts  and  heads,  and  stroke  over  all  their  body 
with  it,  to  show  their  living  desire  of  that  knowledge  that  was 
spoken  of."  Even  the  bitterest  enemy  of  the  settlers,  Pemissa- 
pan, being  dangerously  ill,  and  fancying  that  he  was  suffering 
under  the  wrath  of  the  white  man's  God,  sent  to  beseech  the  in- 

1  Henot  mentions  this,  but  not  in  any  spirit  of  superstition. 


66      AMERICAN  DISCO  VER  Y  D URING  XVIth  CENTUR  V. 

tercession  of  the  English;  and  this  example  was  followed  by 
many  of  his  subjects.  The  conduct  of  Menatonon  contributed 
to  the  same  results.  Not  only  did  he  endeavor  to  ransom  his 
son,  but  he  sent  a  message  to  say  that  he  had  commanded  Okis- 
ko,  king  of  Weopomeiok,  to  yield  himself  servant  and  homager 
to  the  great  Weroanza1  of  England,  and  that  Okisko  had  sent 
back  twenty-four  men  to  Roanoke  to  declare  his  submission. 
This  had  so  great  an  effect  on  Pemissapan  that  he  persuaded  his 
people  to  make  fishing  weirs  for  the  English,  and  to  sow  their 
corn  land.  These  brighter  prospects,  however,  were  soon  over- 
clouded. In  April  Elsenor  died,  and  the  enemies  of  the  English 
gained  the  upper  hand  in  the  councils  of  the  nation.  Sudden 
and  violent  changes,  without  any  adequate  motive,  are  among 
the  chief  characteristics  of  savage  policy,  and  almost  immediate- 
ly upon  the  death  of  Elsenor  a  wholesale  massacre  of  the  stran- 
gers was  arranged.  The  care  with  which  it  was  planned,  and  the 
magnitude  of  the  forces  collected,  shows  how  much  impressed 
the  savages  were  with  the  power  of  the  English.  A  force  of 
more  than  fifteen  hundred  warriors  of  different  tribes  was  to  as- 
semble at  Dasamonpeake,  a  point  in  the  mainland  opposite  to 
the  English  settlement.  Pemissapan  himself  was  to  join  the 
party  at  Dasamonpeake,  while  his  people  at  Roanoke  cut  off  the 
supplies  of  the  English.  Their  fishing  weirs  were  to  be  broken, 
and  it  was  hoped  that  by  this  means  Lane  would  be  forced  to 
scatter  his  forces  over  the  island  in  quest  of  food.  When  the  fort 
was  sufficiently  weakened,  the  leading  men  were  to  be  cut  off  by 
a  night  attack.  Pemissapan  hoped  that  the  rest,  scattered  and 
without  leaders,  would  fall  an  easy  prey.  In  all  these  projects 
Pemissapan  reckoned  on  the  help  of  Skico,  the  son  of  Menatonon, 
whom  he  had  once  saved  by  his  intercession,  when  Lane  had 
condemned  him  to  death  for  an  attempt  to  escape.  Lane's 
subsequent  kind  treatment,  however,  had  wiped  out  any  evil  ef- 
fects of  this  severity,  and  Skico,  preferring  his  captors  to  his 
countrymen,  betrayed  all  Pemissapan's  designs.  Lane  thus  in- 
formed, took  steps  to  anticipate  the  attack.  He  sent  word  to 
Pemissapan  that,  having  heard  of  the  arrival  of  the  English  fleet, 
he  meant  to  go  to  Croaton,  a  neighboring  island  to  the  north, 
where  the  new-comers  would  probably  land,  and  that  he  should 
touch  at  Dasamonpeake  by  the  way  to  get  supplies  of  corn,  and 
men  to  help  him  in  fishing  and  hunting.     Pemissapan,  thinking, 

1  Au  Indian  tide  of  dignity.     The  more  usual  form  is  Weroancc. 


DEPARTURE  OF  THE  COLONISTS.  67 

it  may  be,  that  Lane  had  some  suspicions,  did  not  allow  him  to 
run  into  what  seemed  an  open  trap,  but  promised  to  come  him- 
self to  Roanoke.  Lane,  however,  finding  that  large  forces  were 
assembling  at  Dasamonpeake,  resolved  to  be  beforehand,  and  at 
once  to  cripple  his  enemies  on  the  island  by. seizing  their  canoes 
before  those  on  the  mainland  could  attack  him.  Accordingly, 
an  officer,  whom  Lane  somewhat  oddly  calls  the  Master  of  the 
Light  Horse,  was  sent  on  this  duty.  Carrying  out  his  instruc- 
tions, he  seized  a  canoe  and  killed  its  two  occupants.  The  Indian 
spies,  who  were  now  constantly  on  the  watch,  saw  this  and  gave 
the  alarm,  and  a  skirmish  ensued.  The  savages,  however,  dared 
not  face  the  firearms,  and  fled  into  the  wood.  The  next  day 
Lane  adopted  the  policy  which  has  so  often  served  the  civilized 
man  against  the  savage,  and  anticipated  hostilities  by  an  attack. 
Landing  at  Dasamonpeake,  he  obtained  an  audience  from  Pe- 
rn issapan.  As  soon  as  Lane  came  into  the  presence  of  his  enemy, 
heedless  of  superior  numbers,  he  gave  the  signal  agreed  on. 
Most  of  the  chiefs  were  at  once  shot  down;  Pemissapan,  struck 
by  a  pistol  bullet,  lay  for  dead ;  then,  seizing  a  moment  when  his 
foes  were  engaged,  he  started  up  and  fled  away.  Lane's  attend- 
ant, however,  a  brave  Irishman,  pursued  the  chief  to  the  woods, 
and  soon  returned  with  his  enemy's  head. 

Just  as  the  colony  had  been  saved  from  utter  destruction  by 
the  courage  and  coolness  of  its  leader,  there  came  tidings  of 
Departure  possible  danger  from  another  source.  Pemissapan  fell 
colonists,  on  the  1st  of  June,  and  on  the  8th  Captain  Stafford, 
who  had  been  sent  to  a  neighboring  island  with  a  detachment 
of  some  twenty  men  to  relieve  the  resources  of  the  settlement,  re- 
turned with  the  report  of  twenty-three  sail  seen  out  at  sea.  There 
was  little  likelihood  of  so  large  an  English  fleet  in  these  waters, 
and  for  a  time  it  must  have  seemed  as  if  the  settlement  had  es- 
caped the  savages  only  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  a  worse  foe,  and 
to  be  massacred  by  Spaniards,  as  a  French  colony  in  Florida  had 
been  some  ten  years  earlier.  On  the  next  day  Stafford,  who 
had  been  sent  out  to  reconnoitre,  returned  with  good  news.  The 
fleet  was  under  the  command  of  Drake,  and  had  just  sailed  from 
the  Spanish  Main,  laden  with  the  spoils  of  San  Domingo  and 
Carthagena.  Stafford  brought  with  him  a  letter  from  the  great 
sea-captain,  offering  assistance  in  any  form  that  Lane  might  wish. 
After  all  the  difficulties  and  dangers  which  the  colony  had  under- 
gone, it  says  not  a  little  for  Lane's  courage  and  perseverance 


68     AMERICAN  DISCO  VER  Y  D  URING  XVIth  CENTUR  V. 

that  he  should  not  at  once  have  seized  the  opportunity  to  give, 
up  his  task  and  to  remove  the  colony.  His  request  was  to  be 
allowed  to  send  off  a  number  of  his  men  who  were  weak  and  un- 
fit for  action,  and  to  receive  from  Drake,  in  their  place,  boatmen, 
craftsmen,  and  others.  He  also  asked  for  some  competent  sea- 
men to  search  out  a  better  harbor,  and  if  necessary  to  bring  the 
settlers  back  to  England,  and  for  shipping  a  supply  of  weapons, 
tools  and  victuals.  After  consulting  his  captains,  "  according  to 
his  usual  commendable  manner  of  government,"  Drake  assented 
to  Lane's  request.  He  placed  the  Francis,  a  vessel  of  seventy 
tons,  with  two  pinnaces  and  four  small  boats,  with  four  months' 
victual,  at  Lane's  disposal.  He  also  sent  two  masters  with 
gangs  of  men  to  employ  themselves  as  Lane  should  direct.  The 
assistance  so  liberally  given  was  not  fated  to  reach  the  colony. 
On  the  very  day  that  the  ship  made  for  Roanoke,  a  storm  blew 
up  and  raged  so  for  four  days  that  the  Francis  was  driven  out  to 
sea  and  seen  no  more  by  the  settlers.  Drake  at  once  endeavored 
to  repair  the  loss,  and  offered  to  send,  in  place  of  the  Francis,  the 
Bonner,  a  bark  of  one  hundred  and  seventy  tons,  leaving  her 
in  the  roads,  as  he  did  not  dare  to  bring  her  into  the  harbor. 
At  length  the  courage  of  the  settlers  failed  them.  They  had 
narrowly  escaped  famine  and  massacre.  They  had  expected 
supplies  in  April,  yet  now  in  June  none  had  arrived.  It  seemed 
very  doubtful  whether  the  affairs  of  the  Low  Countries  had  not 
entirely  diverted  the  thoughts  of  men  in  England  from  the  colo- 
ny. Probably  his  hostility  to  Grenville  had  a  share  in  making 
Lane  distrustful  of  assistance.  What  wonder  if  in  the  loss  of  the 
help  sent  them  by  the  Francis  the  settlers  saw  the  very  hand  of 
God  stretched  out  against  them  and  despaired.  A  request,  unan- 
imous, as  it  would  seem,  asking  for  a  passage  to  England  was 
granted  by  Drake.  Fortune  seemed  resolved  to  persecute  the 
settlers  to  the  last.  As  Drake's  pinnaces  were  taking  them  off, 
the  sea  became  so  boisterous  that  it  was  necessary  to  throw  over- 
] board  most  of  the  goods,  with  all  their  drawings,  books,  and 
-writings.  One  record  of  the  settlement  happily  escaped.  John 
White,  a  leading  man  among  the  settlers,  was  an  accomplished 
draftsman,  and  the  paintings  may  yet  be  seen  in  which  he  set 
before  the  eyes  of  Europeans  the  strange  men  and  wondrous 
scenes  of  the  New  World.1 

1  White's  drawings  are  in  the  Sloane  collection  in  the  British  Museum.  Some  of  them 
were  copied  in  De  Bry's  collection.  There  is  a  full  account  of  them  in  the  A  rcheeologia 
Americana,  iv.  21. 


RALEIGH'S  SECOND  COLONY. 


69 


The  help  of  which  the  colonists  had  despaired  was  in  reality 
close  at  hand.  Scarcely  had  Drake's  fleet  left  the  coast  when  a 
Grenviiie's  ship*  well  furnished  by  Raleigh  with  needful  supplies, 
voyage.  reached  Virginia,  and  after  searching  for  the  departed 
settlers,  returned  to  England.  About  a  fortnight  later  Grenville 
himself  arrived  with  three  ships.  He  spent  some  time  in  the 
country  exploring,  searching  for  the  settlers,  and  at  last,  un- 
willing to  lose  possession  of  the  country,  landed  fifteen  men  at 
Roanoke,  well  supplied  for  two  years,  and  then  set  sail  for  Eng- 
land, plundering  the  Azores,  and  doing  much  damage  to  the 
Spaniards  by  the  way.1 

If  the  failure  of  his  colony  was  likely  to  deter  Raleigh  from 
further  efforts,  this  was  more  than  outweighed  by  the  good  report 

Raleigh's  of  the  country  given  both  by  Lane  and  Heriot.  Ac- 
second  . 

coiony.2  cordingly,  in  the  very  next  year,  Raleigh  put  out  an- 
other and  a  larger  expedition  under  the  leadership  of  John 
White.  The  constitution  of  White's  expedition  would  seem  to 
show  that  it  was  designed  to  be  more  a  colony,  properly  speak- 
ing, than  Lane's  settlement  at  Roanoke.  A  government  was 
formed  by  Raleigh,  consisting  of  White  and  twelve  others,  incor- 
porated as  the  governor  and  assistants  of  the  city  of  Raleigh. 
Of  the  hundred  and  fifty  settlers,  seventeen  were  women,  of 
whom  seven  seem  to  have  been  unmarried.  The  emigrants  evi- 
dently did  not  go  as  mere  explorers  or  adventurers ;  they  were  to 
be  the  seed  of  a  commonwealth.  Stafford,  who  had  done  such 
good  service  to  Lane's  colony,  was  among  the  voyagers.  So, 
too,  were  Wanchese  and  Manteo.  The  chief  feature  in  the  voy- 
age wras  the  suspicious  conduct  of  Fernando,  the  pilot,  in  whose 
hands  two  years  before  the  Tiger  had  been  so  nearly  cast  away. 
Only  eight  days  after  leaving  Plymouth  he  "  lewdly  forsook  the 
fly -boat,"  leaving  her  distressed  in  the  Bay  of  Biscay.  Every  at- 
tempt to  take  in  supplies,  whether  of  food,  water,  or  salt,  was 
hindered  by  him,  and  off  Cape  Fear  the  fleet  was  only  saved 
from  the  fatal  results  of  his  misconduct  by  the  care  and  watch- 
fulness of  Stafford.  On  the  2d  of  July  the  fleet  reached  Hater- 
ask,  the  port  at  which  Grenville  had  landed  on  his  last  voyage. 
There  White  took  fifty   men   ashore   to  search  for  the  fifteen 

1  This  voyage  is  shortly  related  in  Hakluyt,  iii.  323. 

2  We  have  an  account  of  this  colony  by  White  himself.  Hakluyt,  iii.  349.  The  writer  in 
a  letter  to  Hakluyt  apologizes  for  the  homely  style.  "  especially  for  the  contentation  of  a  deli- 
cate eare."  It  is  not  impossible  that  Hakluyt  in  this  and  other  instances  may  have  softened 
down  some  of  the  homeliness. 


7  o      A  M ERICA  N  DISCO  VER  Y  D  URING  XVIth  CENTUR  V. 

whom  Grenville  had  left  there.  They  found  nothing  but  the 
bones  of  one  man,  slain,  as  they  afterwards  learned,  by  the  In- 
dians. The  rest  had  disappeared,  and  it  was  not  until  some  time 
afterwards  that  their  countrymen  learned  any  tidings  of  their 
fate.  Ignorant,  no  doubt,  of  the  altered  feelings  of  the  natives, 
Grenville's  men  had  lived  carelessly,  and  kept  no  watch.  Pemis- 
sapan's  warriors  had  seized  the  opportunity  to  revenge  the  death 
of  their  chief,  and  had  sent  a  party  of  thirty  men  against  the 
English  settlement.  Two  of  the  chief  men  were  sent  forward  to 
demand  a  parley  with  two  of  the  English.  The  latter  fell  into 
the  trap,  and  sent  out  two  of  their  number.  One  of  these  was 
instantly  seized  and  killed,  whereupon  the  other  fled.  The  thirty 
Indians  then  rushed  out  and  fired  the  house  in  which  the  Eng- 
lish settlers  took  refuge.  The  English,  thus  dislodged,  forced 
their  way  out,  losing  one  man  in  the  skirmish,  and  at  last,  after 
being  sorely  pressed  by  the  arrows  of  their  enemies,  and  by  their 
skill  in  fighting  behind  covert,  they  reached  the  boat  and  escaped 
to  Haterask.  After  this  neither  Indians  nor  English  ever  heard 
of  them  again. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  Lane  had  entertained  the  plan  of 
moving  his  settlement  from  the  island  of  Roanoke  to  a  point  on  the 
mainland.  Probably,  by  his  advice,  White  had  intended,  after  search- 
ing for  Grenville's  men,  to  return  to  the  fleet  and  to  make  for  the 
shores  of  Chesapeake  Bay.  Persuaded,  however,  by  Fernando,  the 
emigrants  pressed  White  to  re-settle  the  fort  at  Roanoke,  a  plan 
which  he  adopted,  though  apparently  against  his  own  judgment. 
On  the  5th  of  July  the  colonists  were  gladdened  by  the  unlooked- 
for  arrival  of  the  fly-boat.  Three  days  later  they  had  their  first 
meeting  with  the  Indians.  To  many  of  the  savages,  probably  to 
all  the  immediate  subjects  of  Pemissapan,  an  Englishman  was 
now  a  natural  enemy  to  be  slain  whenever  seen.  Howe,  one  of 
the  twelve  assistants,  unwarily  fishing  two  miles  from  his  com- 
rades, was  seen  by  the  savages,  who  instantly  shot  him  with  ar- 
rows, and  then  put  him  to  death  with  their  wooden  swords.  One 
account  says  that  he  received  sixteen  arrow  wounds.  If,  after 
this,  he  still  required  to  be  slain,  Indian  archery  cannot  have  been 
very  efficient.  The  Indians  had  apparently  been  taught  by  Lane 
that  an  Englishman's  death  was  not  likely  to  go  unpunished,  for 
without  waiting  to  see  what  followed,  they  fled,  not  even  staying 
long  enough  to  gather  their  crops.  At  the  end  of  the  month 
Stafford  led  an  exploring  party  to  Croaton,  under  the  guidance  of 


A  TTA  CKED  B  Y  INDIA  NS.  y  l 

Manteo,  whose  kindred  dwelt  there.  At  first  the  savages  drew 
up  as  if  they  would  have  fought,  but  seeing  the  English  advance 
they  fled.  They  were  soon  recalled  by  hearing  Manteo  speak  in 
their  own  tongue.  Assurances  of  friendship  were  then  given  on 
each  side,  and  the  savages  asked  for  some  badges,  as  a  token 
whereby  the  English  might  know  the  friendly  tribes  from  their 
enemies  on  the  mainland.  It  was  arranged  that  the  islanders 
should  endeavor  to  bring  over  those  of  the  mainland  on  the  un- 
derstanding that  all  the  past  offenses  against  the  English  should 
be  forgiven.  Nothing,  however,  came  of  this,  and  on  the  9th  of 
August  Stafford  was  again  sent  out  from  Roanoke  with  Manteo 
as  his  guide,  this  time  to  attack  the  natives  on  the  mainland. 
They  fell  upon  a  party  of  Indians  by  night,  and  in  the  darkness 
narrowly  escaped  an  indiscriminate  slaughter  of  men  and  women. 
Luckily,  only  one  Indian  was  slain  before  the  English  discovered 
that  the  supposed  enemies  were  a  party  of  their  allies  from  Croa- 
ton,  who  had  come  to  gather  in  the  crops  which  the  fugitives  had 
left  behind.  Happily  the  good  offices  of  Manteo  prevented  any 
quarrel.  These  and  his  other  faithful  services  were  acknowl- 
edged shortly  after,  when,  by  the  command  of  Raleigh,  he  was 
baptized  and  somewhat  grotesquely  ennobled  by  the  titles  of 
Lord  of  Roanoke  and  Dasamonpeake.  To  one  who  could  fore- 
see the  future  of  the  American  Indians,  Manteo  with  his  mean- 
ingless titles  might  have  seemed  the  first  fruits  of  a  gigantic  sac- 
rifice, the  type  of  a  race  whom  civilization  could  but  deck  with 
its  idle  frippery,  while  it  slew  them  by  thousands  on  its  altar.  A 
more  hopeful  omen  might  be  drawn  from  the  birth  of  a  child 
five  days  later,  the  first  born  to  English  parents  in  the  New 
World.  Her  father,  Ananias  Dare,  was  one  of  the  twelve  assist- 
ants, and  her  mother,  Eleanor,  was  the  daughter  of  John  White. 
Each  event,  the  birth  of  Virginia  Dare,  the  baptism  and  enno- 
bling of  Manteo,  was  trivial  in  itself,  yet  when  brought  together, 
the  contrast  gives  them  a  solemn  meaning.  It  seemed  as  if 
within  five  days  the  settlement  of  Roanoke  had  seen  an  old 
world  pass  away,  a  new  world  born. 

In  August,  White  wished  to  send  home  two  of  the  assistants 
to  represent  the  state  of  the  colony,  but,  for  some  reason,  none 
white's  °f  tnem  were  willing  to  go.  The  wish  of  the  colony 
return.  generally  seemed  to  be  that  White  himself  should  un- 
dertake the  mission.  After  some  demur,  chiefly  on  the  ground 
that  his  own  private  intererts  required  his  presence  in  the  settle- 


72 


AMERICAN  DISCO  VER  Y  D  URING  XVIth  CENTUR  Y 


ment,  White  assented,  and  on  the  27th  of  August  he  sailed. 
After  a  long  and  painful  voyage,  the  result  of  contrary  winds, 
White  landed  in  Ireland  on  the  18th  of  October,  and  on  the  8th 
of  November  he  reached  Southampton.  With  him  there  landed 
an  Indian,  in  all  likelihood  that  Wanchese  who,  with  Manteo, 
had  accompanied  Amidas  and  Barlow  on  their  homeward  voy- 
age. He,  too,  accepted  the  religion  of  his  new  masters.  Bide- 
ford  Church  was  the  scene  of  his  baptism,  and  another  year  had 
scarcely  passed  when  it  witnessed  his  burial.  No  fitter  resting- 
place  could  be  found  for  the  bones  of  the  Virginia  wanderer  than 
that  Western  land,  the  home  of  Gilbert  and  Raleigh  and  many 
another  in  that  goodly  company,  without  whom  Virginia  might  for 
another  century  have  been  an  untamed  desert. 

Soon  after  White's  return  Raleigh  fitted  out  a  fleet  under  the 
command  of  Grenville.1  Before  that  fleet  could  sail  Raleigh  and 
Attempts  Grenville  were  called  off  to  a  task  even  more  pressing 
the  cofony.  than  the  relief  of  the  Virginia  plantation.  Yet,  not- 
withstanding the  prospect  of  a  Spanish  invasion,  White  persuaded 
Raleigh  to  send  out  two  small  vessels,  with  which  White  himself 
sailed  from  Bideford  on  the  25th  of  April,  1588.  The  sailors, 
however,  fell  into  the  snare  so  often  fatal  to  the  explorers  of  that 
age.  In  the  words  of  a  later  writer,  whose  vigorous  language 
seems  to  have  been  borrowed  from  some  contemporary  chroni- 
cler, the  captains,  "  being  more  intent  on  a  gainful  voyage  than 
the  relief  of  the  colony,  ran  in  chase  of  prizes ;  till  at  last,  one 
of  them  meeting  with  two  ships  of  war,  was,  after  a  bloody  fight, 
overcome,  boarded,  and  rifled.  In  this  maimed,  ransacked,  and 
ragged  condition  she  returned  to  England  in  a  month's  time; 
and  in  about  three  weeks  after  the  other  also  returned,  having 
perhaps  tasted  of  the  same  fare,  at  least  without  performing  her 
intended  voyage,  to  the  distress,  and,  as  it  proved,  the  utter  de- 
struction of  the  colony  in  Virginia,  and  to  the  great  displeasure 
of  their  patron  at  home."  2  Raleigh  had  now  spent  forty  thou- 
sand pounds  on  the  colonization  of  Virginia,  with  absolutely  no 
return.  In  March,  1589,  he  made  an  assignment,  granting  to 
Sir  Thomas  Smith,  White,  and  others,  the  privilege  of  trading  in 
Virginia,  while  he  proved  at  the  same  time  that  he  had  not  lost 

■  The  preparation  for  this  voyage  under  Grenville  and  the  failure  of  the  next  are  told  in 
Hakluyt  in  the  first  edition,  that  of  1589  (p.  771),  but  do  not  appear  in  the  later  edition,  that 
of  1600. 

2  Stith's  History  of  Virginia,  p.  25.  I  do  not  know  what  authority  this  writer  may  have 
had  access  to.     His  account  substantially  agrees  with  that  in  Hakluyt  just  referred  to. 


END  OF  RALEIGH'S  COLONY.  73 

his  interest  in  the  undertaking  by  a  gift  of  a  hundred  pounds  for 
the  conversion  of  the  natives.1  The  unhappy  colonists  gained 
nothing  by  the  change.  For  a  whole  year  no  relief  was  sent. 
When,  at  length,  White  sailed  with  three  ships,  he  or  his  follow- 
ers imitated  the  folly  of  their  predecessors,  and  preferred  bucca- 
neering among  the  Spaniards  in  the  West  Indies  to  conveying 
immediate  relief  to  the  colonists.2  On  their  arrival  nothing  was 
to  be  seen  of  the  settlers.  After  some  search  the  name  Croaton 
was  seen  carved  on  a  post,  according  to  an  arrangement  made 
with  White  before  his  departure,  by  which  the  settlers  were  thus 
to  indicate  the  course  they  had  taken.  Remnants  of  their  goods 
were  found,  but  no  trace  of  the  settlers  themselves.  Years  after- 
wards, when  Virginia  had  been  at  length  settled  by  Englishmen, 
a  faint  tradition  found  its  way  among  them  of  a  band  of  white 
captives,  who,  after  being  for  years  kept  by  the  Indians  in  labori- 
ous slavery,  were  at  length  massacred.3  Such  were  the  only 
tidings  of  Raleigh's  colonists  that  ever  reached  the  ears  of  their 
countrymen.  White,  with  his  three  ships,  returned,  and  the 
colonization  of  Virginia  was  for  a  time  at  an  end.  Even  Raleigh's 
indomitable  spirit  gave  way,  and  he  seems  henceforth  to  have 
abandoned  all  hope  of  a  plantation.  Yet  he  did  not,  till  after 
fifteen  years  of  disappointment  and  failure,  give  up  the  search  for 
his  lost  settlers.  Before  he  died  the  great  work  of  his  life  had 
been  accomplished,  but  by  other  hands.  In  spite  of  the  intrigues 
of  the  Spanish  court  and  the  scoffs  of  playwrights,  Virginia  had 
been  settled  and  had  become  a  flourishing  colony.  A  ship  had 
sailed  into  London  laden  with  Virginian  goods,  and  an  Indian 
princess,  the  wife  of  an  Englishman,  had  been  received  at  court, 
and  had  for  a  season  furnished  wonder  and  amusement  to  the 
fashionable  world. 

England,  under  the  Tudors,  had  done  great  things,  but  the 
colonization  of  America  was  not  destined  to  be  among  them. 
Conclusion.  The  yeomen  and  citizens  of  England  had  to  undergo 
other  training  ere  they  were  fit  to  be  the  founders  of  a  great  em- 
pire beyond  the  Atlantic.  They  were  to  go  through  trials  which 
should  beget  in  them  a  sternness  of  spirit  and  a  steadfastness  of 
purpose  to  which  the  age  of  Elizabeth  was  a  stranger.  Raleigh 
was  in  his  life  the  embodiment  of  that  age,  and  in  his  death  it 

1  Hakluyt,  ed.  1589,  p.  815. 

2  This  voyage  is  related  at  length  in  the  later  edition  of  Hakluyt,  iii.  350. 

8  Strachey's  Travayle  into  Virginia  Britannia,  Hakluyt  Society's  Publications,  p.  26. 
The  author  of  this  work  will  come  before  us  at  a  later  time. 


7  4      A  ME  RICA  A*  DISCO  VER  Y  D  URING  X  VI  th  CENTUR  V. 

passed  away.  The  curtain  fell  on  that  splendid  drama,  in  which 
Drake  and  Hawkins,  Grenville  and  Howard,  had  played  their 
part  so  well,  when  Raleigh  came  back  from  the  Guiana  voyage 
to  linger  in  prison  palsied  and  broken-hearted,  and  at  length  to 
perish  by  the  intrigues  of  that  very  foe  whom  he  had  taught  Eng- 
land to  abhor  and  defy.  The  opening  years  of  the  seventeenth 
century  bring  in  a  new  era  of  colonial  history.  We  pass,  as  it 
were,  from  a  dreamland  of  romance  and  adventure  into  the  sober 
atmosphere  of  commercial  and  political  records,  amid  which  we 
faintly  spell  out  the  first  germs  of  the  constitutional  life  of  British 
America. 


CHAPTER  V.1 

SPANISH  AND    FRENCH    SETTLEMENTS   IN   AMERICA   DURING    THE 
SIXTEENTH    CENTURY. 

Before  we  deal  with  English  colonization  during  the  seventeenth 
century,  it  will  be  well  at  least  to  glance  at  the  efforts  which  other 
Prospers  nations  had  been  making  in  the  same  direction,  and  at 
tion  among  the  causes  which  left  England  a  clear  field  on  the  coast 
of  "Europe  S  of  North  America.  From  two  only  of  the  great  nations 
of  Europe,  Spain  and  France,  had  England  any  rivalry  to  dread. 
Italy  was  threatened  by  foreign  ambition  and  rent  asunder  by  in- 
testine strife.  The  greatness  of  her  maritime  republics  had  al- 
ready waned,  and  the  skill  of  her  seamen,  was  employed  for  the 
profit  and  glory  of  every  nation  save  herself.  The  enterprise  of 
Portugal  was  effectually  kept  within  bounds  by  the  jealousy  of 
her  great  neighbor.  In  another  quarter,  too,  Spain  was  uncon- 
sciously aiding  England.  Fifty  years  later  English  colonists  and 
traders  had  for  their  rivals  a  nation  of  the  same  blood,  of  closely 
kindred  speech,  and  in  many  respects  of  the  like  temper  with 
themselves.  The  mixture  of  enthusiastic  courage  with  practical 
sense,  the  love  of  enterprise  combined  with  and  assisting  a  sound 
and  business-like  aptitude  for  commerce,  were  features  common 
to  both  English  and  Dutch.  But  before  Holland  could  become 
a  great  colonizing  power  she  had  to  become  free.  The  soldiers 
of  Alva  and  Parma  left  her  little  leisure  for  enterprises  beyond 
the  Atlantic,  and  thus  here  as  elsewhere,  Spain,  while  doing  its 

1  I  have  throughout  this  chapter  relied  mainly  on  that  exceedingly  valuable  work,  Mr. 
Parkman's  Pioneers  of  France  in  the  New  World.  Mr.  Parkman's  book  is  based  partly  on 
published  authorities,  some  of  them  translated  into  English,  some  extant  only  in  French  and 
Spanish,  partly  on  MSS.  I  have  collated  Mr.  Parkman's  book  with  his  authorities,  where 
they  are  either  French  or  English  and  in  an  accessible  form.  As  I  am  no  Spanish  scholar, 
and  as  much  of  Mr.  Parkman's  material  lies  beyond  the  reach  of  an  English  student,  I  have 
there  been  obliged  to  follow  him,  and  am  thankful  to  have  so  clear  and  trustworthy  a 
guide. 

75 


76  SPAN  J  S J/  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 

utmost  to  thwart  English  colonization,  was  in  reality  acting  as  its 
ally.  England  then  had  only  two  rivals  in  the  field,  Spain  and 
France.  As  events  proved,  it  was  from  the  second  that  she  had 
most  to  fear.  At  the  outset,  however,  France  must  have  seemed 
but  a  feeble  competitor  compared  with  Spain,  and  the  latter  has, 
at  least  in  order  of  time,  the  best  claim  on  our  attention.  With 
the  Spanish  conquerors  in  America,  and  their  rapid  and  dazzling 
triumphs,  we  are  but  indirectly  concerned.  That  which  belongs 
to  our  subject  is  not  the  success  of  Spain,  but  her  failure.  The 
events  which  baffled  all  her  efforts  to  obtain  a  footing  north  of 
the  Mississippi  have  a  double  interest  for  us.  Their  result  was  to 
keep  open  for  the  English  nation  that  very  region  which  above 
all  others  was  best  fitted  for  the  development  of  its  special  pow- 
ers. Moreover,  the  causes  which  brought  about  the  failure  are 
in  themselves  instructive,  as  illustrating  better,  perhaps,  than  any- 
thing else  could,  the  different  temper  in  which  the  two  nations, 
England  and  Spain,  approached  the  difficulties  of  colonization. 

In  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century  it  might  well  have 
seemed  as  if  the  whole  North  American  continent  was  destined 
Spain  as  a  to  become  a  province  of  Spain.  Nothing,  indeed,  more 
power?ng  strongly  illustrates  the  temper  of  Englishmen  in  that  age, 
at  once  hopeful  and  steadfast,  than  the  stubborn  courage  with  which 
they  set  to  work  to  overthrow  what  might  well  have  seemed  the  as- 
sured monopoly  of  Spain  in  the  treasures  of  the  New  World.  No- 
where in  the  English  writers  of  that  age  do  we  find  any  doubt  as 
to  the  possibility  of  ousting  Spain  or  at  least  achieving  an  equal  suc- 
cess. Yet  to  any  but  enthusiasts  the  task  might  well  have  seemed 
hopeless.  In  the  possession  of  the  islands  Spain  seemed  to  have 
the  one  thing  needful  for  the  conquest  of  the  whole  continent,  a 
basis  of  operation,  easy  of  approach  and  richly  supplied  with  re- 
sources. That  the  conquerors  should  soon  turn  their  attention  to 
the  lands  north  of  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  was  but  natural.  The 
task  of  slowly  and  laboriously  improving  the  territory  already 
gained  was  not  that  for  which  Spaniards  sought  America.  Love 
of  adventure,  thirst  for  conquest,  a  vague  belief  in  boundless 
treasures  to  be  found  somewhere,  these  were  the  feelings  with 
which  every  Spanish  adventurer  set  forth.  It  would  be  indeed 
unjust  to  make  no  distinction  between  a  wise  and  high-minded 
man  like  Cortez,  with  much  of  the  crusader  and  not  a  little  of 
the  statesman  in  his  nature,  and  the  fierce  and  greedy  scum  of 
ruffians  who  brought  disgrace  on  the  Spanish  name.     In  many, 


SPANISH  COL ONIZA  TION.  7  7 

perhaps  in  most,  of  the  Spanish  conquerors,  evil  motives  and 
good,  love  of  gold  and  conquest,  and  an  earnest  zeal  to  recover 
lost  souls,  were  blended,  though  in  very  different  degrees.  But 
one  feature  marked  them  all.  All  set  out  in  a  vague  spirit  of 
knight-errantry  as  different  as  possible  from  the  business-like,  cal- 
culating temper  of  the  English  adventurers.  Had  the  Spaniards 
really  known  how  few  of  such  things  as  they  deemed  good  they 
could  find  north  of  the  Mississippi,  how  poor  a  field  the  country 
offered  for  that  kind  of  warfare  in  which  they  excelled,  we  can 
hardly  suppose  that  they  would  have  ever  attempted  to  explore 
the  coast  of  Florida.  As  it  was,  the  hope  which  first  had  led 
them  thither  was  even  more  wildly  romantic  than  that  which  al- 
lured them  towards  the  shores  of  the  Pacific  and  the  treasure- 
houses  of  the  South. 

Floating  down  from  the  early  days  of  Icelandic  sagas  there 
came  through  the  Middle  Ages  a  vague  tradition  of  a  magic  f 
Ponce  de  fountain  endowing  all  who  drank  of  it  with  endless  life 
Leon-'  and  unfading  youth.  On  such  a  quest  had  the  Norse 
sea-rovers,  in  more  than  one  way  the  forerunners  of  the  Spanish 
conquerors,  sailed  forth  into  the  western  seas.  The  New  World 
seemed  to  the  generation  which  discovered  it  a  very  treasure- 
house  of  wonders,  a  fitting  abode  for  what  might  have  appeared 
fabulous  elsewhere.  In  15 12  a  Castilian  adventurer,  Juan  Ponce  1^ 
de  Leon,  set  out  in  quest  of  the  life-giving  fountain.  Its  sup-  " 
posed  site  was  in  the  island  Bimini  among  the  Lucayos.  Mixed 
up  with  this  hope  was  the  belief  in  a  river  to  be  found  on  the 
mainland  gifted  with  like  virtues.  The  strange  medley  of  medi- 
aeval geography  and  the  belief  that  the  newly-discovered  lands 
were  in  reality  part  of  the  Asiatic  continent,  is  illustrated  by  a 
rumor  that  this  river  was  no  other  than  the  Jordan.  As  with 
more  than  one  of  the  followers  of  Columbus,  De  Leon's  quest 
for  the  fabulous  brought  substantial  discoveries  in  its  train.  Hav- 
ing failed  in  their  object  in  Bimini,  the  explorers  touched  upon 
the  mainland.  The  tropical  splendor  of  the  coast  was  commem- 
orated in  its  name  of  Florida,  and  on  his  return  to  Spain  De 
Leon  was  solemnly  appointed  Adelantado  of  the  newly-discov- 
ered territory.  His  next  expedition,  made  seven  years  later,  was 
less  prosperous.  The  wonder-working  spring  still  eluded  him, 
and  in  a  skirmish  with  the  Indians  of  the  mainland  he  received 
his  death-wound. 


1  Ponce  de  Leon's  two  exneditions  are  told  in  Parkman.  o.  6. 


n8  SPANISH  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 

4 

The  adventures  of  Ponce  de  Leon  bring  before  us  the  Span- 
ish explorer  in  his  imaginative  mood.  The  next  attempts  with 
Lucas  de  which  we  are  concerned  show  us  a  more  practical  and 
Ayiion.'  jess  attractive  side  of  his  character.  As  early  as  1520 
Spanish  tyranny  had  lessened  the  supply  of  native  slaves  in  His- 
paniola.  Accordingly,  one  Lucas  de  Ayllon  bethought  him  of 
importing  a  cargo  from  the  mainland.  He  landed  on  the'  coast 
of  Florida,  and,  like  Amidas  and  Barlow,  was  kindly  received 
by  the  natives.  So  friendly  were  the  relations  between  them  that 
at  length  one  hundred  and  thirty  of  the  natives  ventured  on 
board  Ayllon's  vessel.  Thereupon  the  Spaniard  weighed  anchor 
and  made  off  with  his  prey.  The  venture,  however,  proved  a 
failure.  Already  many  of  the  islanders  had  by  a  voluntary  death 
escaped  from  the  tyranny  of  their  new  masters.  As  might  have 
been  expected,  the  fierce  warriors  of  the  mainland  did  not  show 
a  more  submissive  spirit.  Many  refused  food,  others  pined  from 
grief  and  homesickness.  Nearly  all  died.  In  spite  of  this  fail- 
ure,  Ayllon  made  another  attempt.  He  was  again  greeted  with 
kindness,  but  this  time  it  was  the  kindness  of  treachery.  A  party 
of  two  hundred  Spaniards  who  marched  inland  were  received  at 
an  Indian  town  and  treated  hospitably.  After  four  days'  feasting 
the  Indians  rose  in  a  night  attack  and  fell  upon  their  guests.  A 
few  only  escaped  and  reached  Hispaniola.  Whether  Ayllon  was 
among  them,  or  whether  the  punishment  which  he  deserved  over- 
took him  at  once,  is  matter  of  doubt.  It  is  at  least  certain  that 
he  did  not  long  survive  his  failure. 

The  next  attempt  on  the  coast  of  Florida  was  made  by  Pam- 
philo  de  Narvaez,  best  known  to  the  world  as  the  unsuccessful 
Pamphno  opponent  of  Cortez.  Eager,  it  may  be,  to  equal  the 
vaez.*  triumph  of  his  great  rival,  in  1528  he  landed  on  the 

coast  of  Florida  with  three  hundred  men,  avowedly  in  quest  of 
gold  mines.  For  the  object  at  which  it  aimed,  the  expedition 
was  an  utter  failure.  Yet  it  must  be  granted  that  even  in  the 
failures  of  the  Spanish  adventurers  there  was  a  romance  and  often 
a  grandeur  which  found  no  parallel  in  the  unsuccessful  attempts 
of  our  own  countrymen  in  that  age.  Despite  sickness  and  star- 
vation, with  no  food  save  the  flesh  of  their  worn-out  horses,  the 
little  band  of  Spaniards  traversed  the  continent  and  reached  the 
shore  of  the  Pacific.     There  they  embarked  in  boats  of  their  own 


1  Helps's  Spanish  Conquest  of  the  New  World. 
*  Parkman,  p.  7. 


DE  SOTO. 


79 


building.  The  sea  was  as  unpropitious  as  the  land.  Illness, 
famine  and  storm  wrought  havoc  among  the  adventurers,  till  at 
length  they  resought  the  land  and  made  thjeir  way  on  foot  to  the 
settlements  of  their  countrymen  in  New  Mexico.  Four  only 
reached  that  goal.  Their  leader's  account  of  the  wanderings  and 
sufferings,  of  the  strange  races  among  whom  they  sojourned,  at 
one  time  as  degraded  captives,  at  another  as  honored  and  almost 
deified  guests,  is  one  of  the  most  striking  among  the  many  ro- 
mantic stories  6f  travel  for  which  the  English  reader  is  indebted 
to  Purchas. 

The  example  of  Pamphilo  de  Narvaez  was  followed  ten  years 
later  by  one  of  the  most  famous  among  the  Spanish  conquerors. 
Hemando  Hernando  de  Soto  may  be  regarded  in  his  whole  ca- 
de Soto.'  reer  as  typical  of  the  Spanish  adventurer  in  the  New 
World.  The  son  of  a  gentleman  of  Barcelona,  he  had  crossed 
the  Atlantic  with  nothing  "  save  his  sword  and  his  target."  His 
valor  made  him  conspicuous  even  among  the  daring  spirits  that 
followed  Pizarro ;  his  good  fortune  was  equal  to  his  courage,  and 
he  returned  to  Spain  the  possessor  of  180,000  ducats.  Unlike 
many  of  his  brothers  in  arms,  he  was  no  spendthrift,  and  his  reve- 
nue enabled  him  to  appear  at  the  Spanish  court  with  a  train  of 
attendants  befitting  a  great  nobleman,  and  with  a  trusty  band  of 
followers,  enriched  like  himself  with  the  spoils  of  Peru.  A  noble 
marriage  raised  him  yet  higher,  and  the  fame  of  his  American 
exploits,  aided,  it  may  be,  by  some  share  of  his  American  gold, 
gained  him  the  Governorship  of  Cuba  and  such  portions  of  the 
adjacent  territory  as  he  might  conquer.  In  May,  1559,  De  Soto 
set  sail  from  Spain  with  seven  ships,  containing  seven  hundred 
men  and  over  two  hundred  horses.  He  landed  on  the  mainland 
at  the  spot  known  as  Porto  Santo  Spirito,  which  has  now  recov- 
ered its  Indian  name  of  Tampa  Bay.  There  he  left  a  hundred 
men  and  marched  with  the  rest  of  his  force  inland.  The  tale  of 
his  wanderings  does  not  bear  on  its  surface  any  evidence  of  a 
distinct  plan  of  action.  This  may  perhaps  be  due  to  the  cautious 
character  of  the  leader,  a  man  of  few  words  and  little  given  to 
trust  his  followers  or  regard  their  will.  After  three  months'  wan- 
derings and  various  adventures  with  the  Indians,  sometimes  as 

1  The  principal  account  of  De  Soto's  expedition  is  that  written  by  two  Portuguese  who  took 
part  in  his  expedition.  This  account  was  translated  into  English  by  Hakluyt  under  the  title, 
Virginia  richly  and  truly  Valued,  and  published  in  1609,  with  the  intention  of  stimulating 
the  public  mind  on  the  subject  of  the  colonization  of  Virginia.  It  has  since  been  republished 
three  times  ;  1,  as  a  supplement  to  Hakluyt  in  the  edition  of  1809  :  2,  in  Force's  collection 
of  Pamphlets :  3,  by  the  Hakluyt  Society,  with  a  preface  by  Mr.  W.  Rye. 


So  SPANISH  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 

their  foe,  sometimes  as  their  guest,  De  Soto  took  up  his  winter 
quarters  at  Apalache,  an  Indian  town  some  ten  days'  march  from 
the  coast.  In  spring  he  resumed  his  wanderings.  After  much 
suffering  from  lack  of  food  and  forage,  the  Spaniards  reached  a 
thriving  Indian  settlement  on  the  coast  called  Cutifa-Chiqui. 
This  district  was  governed  by  a  queen,  by  whom  the  Spaniards 
were  received  as  hospitably  as  were  the  English  settlers  by  the 
wife  of  Granganimeo.  Here  most  of  the  adventurers  believed 
that  they  had  found  a  substantial  reward  for  their  labors.  The 
place  would  be  valuable  as  a  station  for  Spanish  ships  on  their 
way  to  Mexico  and  Panama;  the  soil  was  fertile,  the  people 
friendly,  and  there  was  a  rich  pearl  fishery  close  at  hand.  But 
De  Soto's  imagination  was  fired  by  his  recollection  of  the  treas- 
ure-house of  Atahualpa,  and  though  ready  enough  to  listen  to 
counsel,  he  heeded  no  man's  will  but  his  own ;  accordingly  he 
resumed  his  march  northwestward  through  what  is  now  the 
northern  frontier  of  Florida.  The  Indian  queen  was  rewarded 
for  her  hospitality  by  being  carried  off  prisoner,  but  at  the  end  of 
a  fortnight  she  escaped.  From  the  time  of  De  Soto's  departure 
from  Cutifa-Chiqui  the  history  of  the  expedition  is  little  more 
than  a  weary  series  of  skirmishes  with  the  Indians,  varied  some- 
times with  friendly  dealings,  oftener  with  the  grossest  treachery 
and  brutality  on  the  part  of  the  Spaniards.  Nothing  in  the  whole 
narrative  is  more  noteworthy  than  the  dry,  matter-of-fact  way  in 
which  De  Soto's  dealings  with  the  Indians  are  told.  One  native 
burned  for  withholding  information,  others  worried  by  dogs,  or 
tied  up  as  targets  for  De  Soto's  savage  allies,  a  whole  village 
reduced  to  famine  that  the  Spaniards  might  have  maize  for  their 
swine,  all  these  things  are  told  as,  what  indeed  they  were,  every- 
day episodes  of  a  Spanish  march.  It  is  no  exaggeration  to  say 
that  a  man  nowadays  would  be  scouted  as  a  monster  of  cruelty 
if  he  were  to  deal  with  dumb  animals  as  the  Spaniard  of  that  day 
dealt  with  his  fellow-men.1  But  De  Soto  had  sterner  foes  to 
struggle  against  than  the  Indians.  The  supplies  of  corn  became 
precarious,  the  horses  were  an  encumbrance  rather  than  an  aid, 
and  though  game  was  plentiful,  it  was  dangerous  for  the  Spaniards 
to  straggle  in  quest  of  it.  The  winter  had  to  be  faced  in  open 
bivouacs,  without  tents,  while  the  cold  was  so  intense  that  as  the 
soldiers  slept  by  the  fire  the  side  which  was  turned  away  from  it 

l  It  must  in  justice  be  remembered  that  the  narrators  were  not  Spanish,  but  Portuguese.     At 
the  same  time  they  probably  reflect  the  general  feeling  of  the  conquerors. 


DEA  TH  OF  DE  SOTO.  8 1 

was  frozen.  At  length,  worn  by  toil  and  hardship,  and,  if  the 
chronicler  may  be  believed,  by  mental  anxiety,  De  Soto  fell  sick 
and  died.  His  successor,  Liiys  Moseoso  de  Alvarado,  seems  to 
have  been  a  man  of  courage  and  wisdom.  De  Soto  had  ever 
been  studious  to  impress  the  Indians  with  the  idea  of  his  own 
divinity.  De  Alvarado  kept  up  the  delusion.  He  succeeded  in 
concealing  his  chief's  death,  and  persuaded  the  natives  that  the 
Child  of  the  Sun  had  only  gone  on  a  journey  to  heaven  and 
would  soon  be  back  among  them.  At  length,  under  their  new 
leader,  the  remnant  of  the  adventurers  reached  the  banks  of  the 
Mississippi,  where  they  built  boats  and  journeyed  down  the  river, 
sorely  harassed  as  they  went  by  the  archery  of  the  Indians. 
When  at  length  they  reached  the  Spanish  settlement  of  Panuco 
on  the  Mexican  coast,  the  band  had  been  reduced  by  four  years' 
wandering  to  one-third  of  its  original  numbers. 

To  us  De  Soto's  expedition  is  chiefly  interesting  as  an  illustra- 
tion of  the  nature  of  those  obstacles  which  withheld  the  Span- 
Lesson  of  iards  from  extending  their  career  of  conquest  north- 
failure,  ward.  John  Smith  or  Miles  Standish  were  not  less 
fitted  to  conquer  Mexico  or  Peru  than  the  Spanish  conquerors 
were  to  deal  with  the  difficulties  of  backwoods  warfare.  Where 
food,  whether  for  man  or  beast,  is  scarce  and  transport  conse- 
quently difficult,  the  two  great  instruments  of  the  Spanish  con- 
quest, horses  and  firearms,  lose  their  value.  Again,  the  whole 
system  of  warfare  adopted  by  the  Spaniards  in  the  New  World 
needed  that  they  should  get  their  enemy  concentrated,  deal* with 
him  at  a  single  blow,  and  then  turn  his  resources  against  himself. 
Moreover,  a  long  succession  of  petty  skirmishes,  though  they 
might  not  have  exhausted  the  resolution  of  the  Spaniards,  would 
at  least  have  served  to  disabuse  the  Indians  of  that  belief  in  the 
divinity  of  the  white  man  which  did  so  much  to  facilitate  the 
conquest. 

Such  a  tale  as  that  of  De  Soto  serves,  too,  to  remind  us  how 
much  of  the  difference  between  the  careers  of  England  and  Spain 
in  the  New  World  was  due  to  the  difference  between  the  races 
with  which  each  had  to  deal.  The  vices  of  the  slaveholder  had 
already  fixed  their  roots  in  the  Spanish  character,  and  in  the  New 
World  they  speedily  grew  and  bore  fruit.  The  English  settler 
was  exposed  to  no  such  temptation.  Unlike  the  feeble  native 
of  Hispaniola  or  Peru,  the  Red  Indian  might  be  hated,  but  he 
could  not  be  despised;  he  might  be  extirpated,  but  he  could  not 

6 


82  SPANISH  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 

be  enslaved.  Beside  this,  "the  task  which  lay  before  Spain  was 
too  great  for  a  single  nation.  That  such  conquests  as  those  of 
Mexico  and  Peru  may  be  attended  with  good,  both  to  the  con- 
queror and  the  conquered,  is  sufficiently  shown  by  the  history  of 
India.  But  if  the  result  is  to  be  wholesome,  the  process  must  be 
gradual,  and  there  must  be  time  for  the  ruling  race  to  acquire  the 
needful  knowledge  and  to  be  slowly  trained  in  the  art  of  com- 
mand. No  such  opportunities  were  vouchsafed  to  the  conquer- 
ing Spaniards.  They  had  to  rule  a  land  where  everything  was 
unfamiliar  and  where  they  were  still  dazzled  and  bewildered  by 
the  romantic  splendor  and  dreamlike  rapidity  of  their  conquest. 
The  result  was  that  Spanish  civilization  overflowed  a  whole  con- 
tinent and  turned  to  barbarism  in  the  process.  The  English  set- 
tlers were  saved  from  such  dangers  alike  by  the  nature  of  the 
country  and  of  the  people.  The  Spaniard  could  isolate  himself 
on  his  estate  and  live  like  a  petty  chieftain  with  his  repartimento 
of  Indians.  The  English  settlers,  hemmed  in  by  a  belt  of  hostile 
barbarism,  were  driven  into  union  and  cohesion.  When  they 
extended  their  borders  it  was  by  a  slow  and  regular  process  of 
expansion.  Even  as  it  was,  the  history  of  the  English  colonists 
in  the  West  Indies  and  south  of  the  Chesapeake  Bay  serves  to 
show  that  they  did  not  wholly  escape  the  temptation  which  be- 
set the  Spaniards,  and  that  the  difference  in  result  was  due,  at 
least,  as  much  to  circumstances  as  to  national  character. 

We  must  now  turn  to  the  other  great  nation  with  which  Eng- 
land was  destined  to  struggle  for  her  American  empire.  In  many 
France  as  a  respects  France  might  have  seemed  to  enter  on  the 
nationZing  task  with  better  prospects  than  her  old  rival.  While 
England  was  torn  to  pieces  by  the  Wars  of  the  Roses,  French 
commerce  had  been  thriving  and  spreading  under  the  wisa^rule 
of  Lewis  XI.  Francis  I.,  whose  tastes  and  pursuits  reflected 
every  shade,  goocl  and  evil,  in  the  tendencies  of  his  age,  was, 
like  the  Tudors,  the  patron  of  Italian  seamen.  Among  the  up- 
per classes,  indeed,  the  passion  for  the  sea  had  taken  no  deep 
root.  France  had  no  Grenvilles  or  Gilberts,  but  the  ports  of 
Brittany  and  Normandy  sent  out  a  race  of  sailors  as  hardy  and 
venturesome  as  those  who  sailed  from  Bideford  and  Plymouth. 
France,  too,  unlike  Spain,  was  filled  with  the  pervading  spirit  of 
progress.  She,  indeed,  refused,  though  not  without  a  struggle, 
to  take  part  in  the  great  spiritual  emancipation  of  the  age.  But 
she  could  not,  like  Spain,  stand  aloof  in  isolated  bigotry,  and  in 


FRENCH  COLONIZATION.  8$ 

everything  except  religion  France  was  the  true  child  of  the  Re- 
naissance. There  were,  too,  in  the  French  character  many  of 
the  features  most  needed  for  success  in  colonization.  In  versa- 
tility and  in  the  power  of  adapting  himself  readily  to  the  varied 
requirements  of  colonial  life,  the  Frenchman  is  unequaled.  No 
nation  has  ever  shown  more  aptitude  for  dealing  with  savages. 
The  Spanish  colonists  regarded  the  Indians  as  brute  beasts.  The 
New  England  Puritan,  with  a  few  honorable  exceptions,  re- 
garded them  as  devil  worshipers  and  was  saved  from  the  vices 
of  the  slaveholder,  not  so  much  by  his  humanity  as  by  his  super- 
stition and  his  self-respect.  The  Frenchman,  on  the  other  hand,  . 
was  ready  to  live  with  the  Indians,  to  feast  with  them,  to  marry  \ 
among  them.  The  rudeness  of  their  life  did  not  repel,  nor  their 
sterner  vices  shock  him.  There  were,  indeed,  two  drawbacks 
which  went  far  to  outweigh  all  the  advantages  with  which  France 
entered  upon  her  colonial  career.  After  the  first  impulse  was 
spent  and  the  newly-awakened  enthusiasm  for  colonization  and  • 
discovery  ha"d  faded,  the  ruling  powers  in  France  showed  little 
desire  to  support  enterprises  which  promised  but  a  poor  return, 
and  which  might  involve  them  in  difficulties  with  other  European 
powers.  The  English  colonies,  it  is  true,  had  to  face  the  same 
difficulty  and  overcame  it.  Virginia  owed  but  little  to  royal 
favor.  New  England  grew  into  greatness  in  the  face  of  almost  :. 
unceasing  hostility  from  the  Crown.  But  Englishmen  had  re-  ' 
ceived  a  training  in  self-government  which  made  them  inde- 
pendent of  court  influence.  A  colony  filled  with  the  spirit  of  the 
Long  Parliament  soon  learned  to  despise  the  hostility  of  a  Stuart 
king.  Under  the  highly  centralized  government  of  France  court 
favor  was  the  very  breath  of  life,  and  without  it  there  was  little 
chance  of  the  American  colonies  attaining  to  anything  more  than 
a  sickly  and  stunted  growth.  Moreover,  all  that  was  most  active 
and  progressive,  all  that  was  best  fitted  to  struggle  with  the  diffi- 
culties of  the  New  World,  was  severed,  not  only  from  the  court 
of  France  but  from  the  mass  of  the  nation,  by  fierce  religious 
hostility.  Had  France  but  given  full  play  to  the'  impulse  of  her 
bravest  sons,  had  she  maintained  her  Huguenot  colonies  on  the 
coast  of  Florida,  and  bade  defiance  to  Spain  in  the  name  of  re- 
ligious freedom,  the  whole  history  of  America  might  have  been 
changed.  Even  as  it  was,  with  all  the  drawbacks  of  her  polit- 
ical and  religious  condition,  we  cannot  but  feel  that  it  was  a  pe- 
culiarly adverse  fate  which  doomed  France  to  waste  her  energies 


1- 


84  SPANISH  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 

on  the  ice-bound  valley  of  the  St.  Lawrence  and  the  unwholesome 
swamps  of  Florida,  while  England  was  extending  her  empire 
over  all  that  rich  tract  between  Cape  Breton  and  the  Missis- 
sippi. 

Probably  the  earliest  definite  attempt  made  by  any  Frenchman 
to  establish  a  colony  in  the  New  World  was  that  of  the  Baron  of 
DeLery's  Lery.  In  1518  he  headed  an  expedition  with  the  in- 
setSent.  tention  of  establishing  a  colony.  When,  however,  he 
reached  the  American  coast,  he  had  been  so  long  detained  by 
adverse  weather,  that  his  heart  failed  him,  and  he  abandoned  his 
scheme.  The  cattle  which  were  to  have  formed  the  stock  of  the 
settlement  were  landed  on  Sable  Island,  where  they  throve  and 
multiplied,  and  at  a  distant  day  served  to  support  a  band  of  more 
persevering  French  colonists.1 

Six  years  later  Verrazani,  the  Florentine  navigator,  set  forth  in 
command  of  five  ships,  with  a  commission  from  Francis  I.  Like 
Vemuani.*  Columbus  and  many  of  his  imitators,  Verrazani  had 
rvague  hopes  of  reaching  Cathay  by  a  western  route.  Storms 
and  hostilities  with  the  Spaniards  reduced  Verrazani's  fleet  to  one 
ship.  With  that  he  reached  what  was  afterwards  the  shore  of 
North  Carolina.  Thence  he  sailed  north,  touching  at  various 
points  and  occasionally  landing.  The  natives  were  for  the  most 
part  friendly,  but  those  of  New  England  refused  either  to  receive 
or  visit  the  strangers,  and  would  only  trade  with  them  by  a  rope 
let  down  from  the  cliffs  to  the  boat.  With  this  voyage  all  certain 
knowledge  of  Verrazani's  career  ends.  In  another  year  the  bat- 
tle of  Pavia  had  been  fought  and  Verrazani's  patron  was  a  pris- 
oner at  Madrid.  A  few  vague  rumors  of  the  navigator's  later 
career  are  all  that  has  reached  us.  From  one  we  learn  that  he 
was  hung  by  the  Spaniards  as  a  pirate.  Another,  and  a  more 
dreadful,  version  of  his  fate  represents  him  captured  by  savages 
and  a  victim  to  his  cannibal  foes  in  the  sight  of  his  fellow- 
voyagers. 

France,  however,  like  England,  did  not  long  depend  on  foreign 
skill  for  her  maritime  success.  Her  seamen  soon  became  familiar 
Cartier's  with  the  Atlantic  voyage,  and  as  early  as  1527  twelve 
voyage.*  French  ships  were  found  together  at  the  Newfoundland 
fishery.     As  in  England,  the  first  successful  results  were  achieved 

1  Lescarbot,  Histoire  de  la  Nouvelle  France,  b.  i.  p.  21  (ed.  1618). 
*Parkman,  p.  176. 

1  Parkman,  p.  181.  His  account  of  Carrier's  voyage  is  derived  from  Lescarbot  and  the 
JdSS.  of  Carrier  himself. 


CARTIER.  85 

by  the  union  of  a  court  favorite  and  a  practical  seaman.  The 
part  of  Raleigh  was  filled  by  Brion-Chabot,  the  High  Admiral 
of  France,  while  those  of  Amidas  and  Lane  were  worthily  com- 
bined in  Jacques  Cartier,  a  brave  and  experienced  sea-captain 
from  St.  Malo.  In  1534  Cartier  made  a  preliminary  voyage  of 
exploration.  Touching  at  Newfoundland,  he  sailed  through  the  / 
straits  of  Belle  Isle  and  explored  the  east  shore  of  the  island,  a 
region  which  for  the  barrenness  of  its  soil  and  the  severity  of  its 
climate  seemed  the  very  spot  whither  Cain  had  been  banished. 
The  coast  of  New  Brunswick  held  out  a  more  inviting  prospect. 
The  fertility  of  the  soil  reminded  the  voyagers  of  their  native 
Brittany,  and  one  field  there  seemed  worth  more  than  the  whole 
of  Newfoundland.  Thence  Cartier  sailed  into  the  Gulf  of  St. 
Lawrence,  and  would  have  explored  the  great  River  of  Canada, 
but  storms  arose  and  he  deemed  it  prudent  to  return  to  France 
before  bad  weather  set  in.  His  report  of  the  country  was  en- 
couraging. The  soil,  as  we  have  seen,  promised  well,  and  the 
voyagers  had  not  yet  learned  the  terrors  of  a  Canadian  winter. 
The  natives  were  rude  in  their  habits,  but  they  were  uniformly 
peaceful  and  ready  to  trade  on  easy  terms  for  such  goods  as  they  . 
possessed.  There  seemed  good  reason  to  hope,  too,  that  they 
might  be  converted  to  Christianity,  and  one  of  them  had  shown 
confidence  enough  in  the  strangers  to  trust  them  with  his  two 
children,  who  were  easily  reconciled  to  their  captivity  by  the  gift 
of  red  caps  and  colored  shirts. 

In  the  next  year  Cartier  again  went  forth  with  three  ships. 
After  confessing  and  taking  the  sacrament  in  the  church  of  St. 
Cartier's  Malo,  the  adventurers  set  sail  on  Whit  Sunday.  Among 
voyage.«  them  was  the  cup-bearer  to  the  Dauphin,  Claudius  de 
Pont-Briand.  As  before,  the  strangers  were  well  received  by  the 
Indians,  and  landed  safely  at  Quebec.  There  Cartier  left  his 
sailors  with  instructions  to  make  a  fortified  camp,  while  he  him- 
self, with  the  greater  part  of  his  men-at-arms  and  his  two  Indian 
captives  of  the  year  befo  e,  should  explore  the  upper  banks  of 
the  St.  Lawrence,  and  penetrate,  if  possible,  to  the  great  Indian 
dity  of  Hochelaga.  The  Indians,  though  outwardly  friendly, 
seem  either  to  have  distrusted  the  French,  or  else  grudged  their 
neighbors  at  Hochelaga  such  valuable  allies,  and  would  have  dis- 
suaded Cartier  from  his  expedition.  When  their  remonstrances 
proved  useless,  the  savages  tried  to  work  on  the  fears  of  their 

1  Parkman  p.  183. 


86  SPANISH  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 

visitors.  Three  canoes  came  floating  down  the  river,  each  con- 
taining a  fiendish  figure  with  horns  and  blackened  face.  The  - 
supposed  demons  delivered  themselves  of  a  threatening  harangue 
and  then  paddled  to  the  shore,  and  whether  to  complete  the  per- 
formance or  through  honest  terror,  fell  fainting  in  their  boats. 
The  Indians  then  explained  to  Cartier  that  their  God  had  sent  a 
warning  to  the  presumptuous  strangers,  bidding  them  refrain  from 
the  intended  voyage.  Cartier  replied  that  the  Indian  god  could 
have  no  power  over  those  who  believed  in  Christ.  The  Indians 
acquiesced,  and  even  affected  to  rejoice  in  the  approaching,  dis- 
comfiture of  their  deity.  Cartier  and  his  followers  started  on  their 
voyage.  After  a  fortnight's  journey  they  came  in  sight  of  the 
natural  citadel  of  Hochelaga,  the  royal  mount,  as  they  fitly  called 
it,  which  has  since  given  its  name  to  the  stately  city  below.  The 
site  of  that  city  was  then  filled  by  a  village  surrounded  by  maize 
fields  and  strongly  fortified  after  the  Iroquois  manner.  There  tlie 
French  were  received  with  hospitality  and  with  a  reverence  which 
seemed  to  imply  that  they  were  something  more  than  mortal. 
The  sick  were  laid  before  them  to  be  healed,  and  when  Cartier 
read  portions  of  the  Gospel  in  French,  the  savages  listened  rev- 
erently to  the  unknown  sounds.  On  his  return,  Cartier  found  his 
fort  securely  palisaded,  and  decided  there  to  await  the  winter. 
So  far  all  had  gone  well,  but  the  settlers  were  soon  destined  to 
see  the  unfavorable  side  of  Canadian  life.  The  savages,  after 
their  fickle  nature,  began  to  waver  in  their  friendship.  A  worse 
danger  was  to  come.  Scurvy  broke  out,  and  before  long  twenty- 
five  men  had  died  and  not  more  than  three  or  four  remained  well. 
At  length  the  leaf  of  a  tree  whose  virtues  were  pointed  out  by  the 
Indians,  restored  the  sufferers  to  health.  When  winter  disap- 
peared and  the  river  again  became  navigable,  Cartier  determined 
to  return.  He  was  anxious  that  the  French  king  should  learn 
the  wonders  of  the  country  from  the  mouths  of  its  own  people. 
Accordingly,  with  a  characteristic  mixture  of  caution,  subtlety, 
and  conciliation,  he  allured  the  principal  chief  Donnacona  and 
some  of  his  followers  into  the  fort.  There  they  were  seized  and 
carried  to  the  ships,  nominally  as  honored  guests,  like  Montezuma 
among  the  followers  of  Cortez.  Cartier  then  set  sail  with  his 
captives,  and  in  July  reached  St.  Malo.  The  Indians,  as  was 
usually  the  fate  of  such  captives,  pined  under  a  strange  sky,  and 
when  Cartier  sailed  again  not  one  was  alive. 

Four  years  elapsed  before  another  voyage  was  undertaken. 


ROBERVAL.  87 

In  1 540.  a  fleet  of  five  ships  was  made  ready  at  the  expense  ot 
,Cartier's  the  king,  who  reserved  to  himself  a  third  of  the  profits 
voyaged  of  the  voyage.  Cartier  was  appointed  captain-gen- 
eral, with  instructions  to  establish  a  settlement  and  to  labor  for 
the  conversion  of  the  savages.  With  Cartier  was  associated  a 
man  of  high  birth,  the  Sieur  de  Roberval,  who  was  appointed 
Viceroy  and  Lieutenant-general  of  Newfoundland,  Labrador,  and 
all  the  territory  explored  by  Cartier,  with  the  title  of  Lord  of 
Norumbega.  This  division  of  command  seems  to  have  led  to  no 
good  results.  Another  measure,  which  probably  contributed  to 
the  failure  of  the  expedition,  was  the  mode  employed  for  raising 
the  necessary  crews.  Cartier,  like  Frobisher,  was  empowered  to 
search  the  prisons  for  recruits.  Even  before  the  voyage  began 
things  took  an  unfavorable  turn.  Roberval's  ammunition  was 
not  ready  at  the  stated  time,  and  the  departure  of  the  fleet  was 
thereby  hindered.  At  length,  lest  further  delay  should  give 
offense  at  court,  Cartier  sailed,  leaving  Roberval  to  follow.  The 
first  interview  with  the  savages  was  a  source  of  some  fear,  as  it 
was  doubtful  how  they  would  receive  the  tidings  of  Donnacona's 
death.  Luckily  the  chief  to  whom  the  news  was  first  told  was 
Donnacona's  successor,  and,  as  might  have  been  expected,  he 
showed  no  dissatisfaction  at  Carder's  story.  The  French  then 
settled  themselves  in  their  old  quarters  at  Quebec.  Two  of  the 
four  ships  were  sent  home  to  France  to  report  the  safe  arrival  of 
the  expedition,  while  Cartier  himself,  with  two  boats,  set  out  to 
explore  the  river  above  Hochelaga.  After  his  departure  the  re- 
lations between  the  settlers  and  the  Indians  became  unfriendly,  a 
change  probably  due  in  part  to  the  loss  of  Donnacona  and  his 
companions.  Whatever  was  the  cause,  the  danger  seemed  so 
serious  that  Cartier,  on  his  return,  decided  to  abandon  the  colony 
and  to  make  for  France.  From  later  events  it  would  seem  as  if 
Cartier  had  no  friendly  feeling  towards  Roberval,  and  jealousy 
may  have  had  some  share  in  leading  him  to  forsake  the  enter- 
prise for  which  he  had  endured  and  risked  so  much.  On  his 
homeward  voyage  he  put  into  the  harbor  of  St.  John  in  New- 
foundland. There  he  met  Roberval  with  three  ships  and  two 
hundred  men.  Their  meeting  seems  to  have  been  friendly,  but 
Cartier,  instead  of  obeying  Roberval's  orders  and  returning  with 
him  to  Canada,  quietly  weighed  anchor  in  the  night  and  sailed 
away  to  France. 

1  Parkman,  p.  197. 


8S  SPANISH  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 

With  this  inglorious  departure  ends  the  career  of  the  first  great 
French  colonizer.  Roberval  resumed  his  voyage  and  landed 
Robervai's  aDove  Quebec.  There  he  built  a  single  abode  for  the 
settlement.  whole  colony,  on  the  model  of  a  college  or  monastery, 
with  a  common  hall  and  kitchen.  Of  the  doings  of  the  settlers 
we  have  but  scanty  accounts,  but  we  learn  enough  to  see  that 
the  colony  was  ill-planned  from  the  outset,  and  that  either  Ro- 
berval was  unfit  for  command  or  singularly  unfortunate  in  his  sub- 
jects. The  supplies  were  soon  found  to  be  inadequate  and 
scurvy  set  in,  the  colonists  became  disorderly,  and  Roberval 
ruled  them  with  a  rod  of  iron.  Trifling  offenses  were  punished 
with  fearful  severity ;  men  and  women  were  flogged,  and  if  we 
may  believe  one  account,  the  punishment  of  death  was  inflicted 
with  no  sparing  hand.  How  long  the  colony  lingered  on  is  un- 
known. Roberval  himself  returned  to  France  only,  it  is  said,  to 
die  by  a  violent  death  in  the  streets  of  Paris.  There  is  nothing 
to  tell  us  whether  his  colonists  returned  with  him  or  whether,  like 
White's  unhappy  followers,  they  were  left  to  fall  victims  to  the 
horrors  of  the  wilderness.  Whatever  was  their  fate,  no  attempt 
was  made  to  restore  the  colony,  and  the  St.  Lawrence  was  left 
for  more  than  fifty  years  to  the  savages  and  wild  beasts. 

The  next  French  settlement  in  America  is  noteworthy  alike 
from  the  character  of  its  leader  and  from  the  motives  which  led 
The  Hu-  t0  its  formation.  It  has  been  truly  said  that  the  colo- 
•ett?e°ment  nization  of  the  New  World  is  a  record  of  the  persecu- 
in  Bruit.'  t;on  of  the  0ld.  That  Protestantism  in  her  early  strug- 
gles for  life  and  freedom  should  turn  to  the  newly  discovered 
lands  as  a  possible  home  was  but  natural,  and  by  no  Protestants 
was  a  refuge  more  needed  than  by  the  French  Huguenots.  The 
first  man,  it  would  seem,  who  distinctly  grasped  the  idea  of 
building  up  a  Protestant  state  in  America  was  Coligny.  If  he 
himself  had  undertaken  the  command  of  such  an  enterprise,  the 
Massachusetts  Puritans  might  have  been  anticipated  by  nearly  a 
century,  and  the  tragedy  of  St.  Bartholomew  might  have  wanted 
its  most  illustrious  victim.  As  it  was,  the  command  was  entrusted 
to  a  man,  wonderful  for  his  various  gifts  even  in  that  age  of  versa- 
tile genius,  but  wholly  without  the  earnestness  of  purpose  and 
the  stable  wisdom  of  Coligny.  Nicholas  de  Villegagnon  was 
eminent  as  a  soldier  and  a  sailor,  and,  unhappily  for  his  fellow- 
settlers,  as  a  theologian.     His  feats  of  arms  against  the  Moors 


1  Parkman,  p.  20.     His  account  is  taken  in  large  part  from  Villegagnon's  own  writings. 


VILLEGA  GNON.  8  9 

recalled  the  prowess  of  the  Cid,  and  the  escape  of  Mary  Stuart 
from  the  English  fleet  that  dogged  her  passage  to  France,  was 
due  to  his  courage  and  skillful  seamanship.  But  with  these 
brilliant  gifts  were  combined  qualities  which  wholly  unfitted  him 
for  his  position  as  the  governor  of  a  newly-founded  state.  Hasty 
in  forming  his  religious  opinions,  he  was  mercilessly  intolerant  to 
all  who  refused  to  accept  them.  The  colony  was  unfortunate  in 
its  site  as  well  as  in  its  leader.  The  spot  pitched  on  was  the 
coast  of  Brazil,  a  habitation  ill-fitted  for  the  inhabitants  of  a  tem- 
perate climate,  and  moreover  calculated  to  excite  the  jealousy 
alike  of  Spaniards  and  Portuguese.  There,  however,  Villega- 
gnon  established  himself  with  two  shiploads  of  emigrants.  Be- 
fore long  his  rule  was  found  so  intolerable  that  a  conspiracy  was 
formed  to  murder  him,  and  he  was  only  saved  by  three  Scotch 
soldiers  who  revealed  the  plot.  Nevertheless  the  reports  sent 
home  were  such  as  to  induce  a  fresh  party  of  emigrants  to  come 
out.  Two  hundred  and  ninety  in  all  sailed,  with  five  Calvinist 
pastors  from  Geneva.  Villegagnon's  love  of  theological  specu- 
lation and  controversy  soon  involved  him  in  disputes  with  the 
ministers,  and  these  disputes  finally  produced  the  not  unnatural 
result  of  reconverting  Villegagnon  into  an  orthodox  Catholic. 
His  return  to  his  former  faith  was  soon  accompanied  by  rigorous 
measures  against  his  Calvinist  opponents.  Three  of  the  ministers 
were  put  on  board  a  vessel  with  insufficient  supplies  of  food  and 
water  and  shipped  off  to  France.  After  a  long  and  suffering  voy- 
age, they  arrived  in  safety.  The  disciples  whom  they  left  in 
America  fared  even  worse.  Three  of  the  most  zealous  of  them 
were  thrown  into  the  sea  by  the  order  of  the  commander,  who 
then  delivered  an  address  to  his  followers,  warning  them  against, 
the  heresies  of  Luther  and  Calvin,  and  threatening  a  like  pun- 
ishment to  all  who  should  fall  away.  Villegagnon,  however, 
soon  longed  for  a  wider  field  for  his  new-born  zeal.  He  returned 
to  France  and  was  soon  deep  in  a  theological  conflict  with  Cal- 
vin. The  departure  of  their  tyrant  brought  no  gain  to  the  colo- 
nists. Before  a  year  the  Portuguese  attacked  and  routed  them 
and  destroyed  their  settlement.  Thus  ended  the  only  attempt 
of  the  French  to  obtain  a  footing  in  South  America. 

In  1562  the  French  Huguenot  party,  headed  by  Coligny, 
made  another  attempt  to  secure  themselves  a  refuge  in  the  New 
World.  Two  ships  set  sail  under  the  command  of  Jean  Ribault, 
a  brave  and  experienced  seaman,  destined  to  play  a  memorable 


1- 


9o  SPANISH  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 

and  a  tragic  part  in  the  history  of  America.  Ribault  does  not 
seem  to  have  set  out  with  any  definite  scheme  of  colonization,  but 
Ribauifs  rather,  like  Amidas  and  Barlow,  to  have  contented  him- 
se°tyuemeantd'  self  with  preliminary  exploration.  In  April  he  landed 
on  the  coast  of  Florida.  The  fertility  of  the  country  and  the 
friendliness  of  the  natives  delighted  the  voyagers.  Nevertheless 
they  decided  to  explore  the  coast  farther  and  sailed  northward. 
Finally  they  reached  the  harbor  of  Port  Royal,  where,  as  the 
I  narrator  tells  us,  all  the  ships  of  Europe  might  have  found  harbor- 
*  age.  The  Indians  were  as  friendly  as  those  farther  south,  and 
encouraged  their  visitors  with  stories  of  a  neighboring  land  called 
Sevola,  ruled  over  by  a  giant,  where  gold  and  silver  were  so 
plentiful  that  they  were  deemed  mere  dross.  Although  there 
had  been  no  definite  scheme  for  colonization,  Ribault  thought 
that  it  would  be  well  to  take  possession  of  a  spot  so  rich  in 
promise.  Accordingly  he  called  together  his  company,  and  after 
an  exhortation,  adorned,  if  we  may  believe  our  informant,  with 
somewhat  pedantic  references  to  the  heroes  of  antiquity,  he  pro- 
posed that  some  of  them  should  volunteer  to  garrison  a  fort  while 
the  rest  returned  to  Europe.  So  hopeful  seemed  the  scheme, 
and  so  effectual  was  Ribault's  persuasion,  that  his  only  difficulty 
was  in  restricting  the  number  who  were  to  stay.  Finally  thirty 
were  chosen  to  remain  under  the  command  of  Albert  de  Pierria. 
After  he  had  laid  the  foundations  of  a  fort,  called  in  honor  of 
the  king  Charlefort,  Ribault  returned  to  France.  He  would 
seem  to  have  been  unfortunate  in  his  choice  alike  of  colonists 
and  of  a  commander.  The  settlers  lived  on  the  charity  of  the 
Indians,  sharing  in  their  festivities,  wandering  from  village  to 
village,  and  wholly  doing  away  with  any  belief  in  their  superior 
wisdom  and  power  which  might  yet  have  possessed  their  savage 
neighbors.  That  their  commander  should  have  grown  harsh  can 
hardly  be  a  source  of  wonder.  De  Pierria,  however,  if  we  may 
believe  the  complaints  of  his  followers,  showed  all  the  severity  of 
Villegagnon,  without  his  zeal  or  ability.  At  length  he  met  with 
the  fate  which  Villegagnon  had  so  narrowly  escaped.  His  men, 
enraged  at  the  execution  of  one  comrade  and  the  cruel  banish- 
ment of  another,  rose  and  slew  De  Pierria.  Nicholas  Barr, 
whom  they  chose  as  his  successor,  naturally  avoided  any  severity, 
and  the  little  colony  was  free  from  one  of  its  miseries.     Under 

1  The  history  of  Ribault's  colony  is  told  in  a  translation  from  the  French  published  by 
Hakluyt  in  15S7.     The  substance  of  it  is  taken  from  Ribault's  own  journal. 


RIBAULT. 


91 


the  new  commander  it  enjoyed  internal  peace,  but  a  new  danger 
soon  threatened  it.  France  was  torn  asunder  by  civil  war,  and 
had  no  leisure  to  think  of  an  insignificant  settlement  beyond  the 
Atlantic.  No  supplies  came  to  the  settlers,  and  they  could  not 
live  forever  on  the  bounty  of  their  savage  neighbors.  The  set- 
tlers decided  to  return  home.  To  do  this  it  was  needful  to  build 
a  bark  with  their  own  hands  from  the  scanty  resources  which  the 
wilderness  offered.  Whatever  might  have  been  the  failings  of 
the  settlers,  they  certainly  showed  no  lack  of  energy  or  of  skill  in 
concerting  means  for  their  departure.  They  felled  the  trees  to 
make  planks,  moss  served  for  caulking,  and  their  shirts  and  bed- 
ding for  sails,  while  their  Indian  friends  supplied  cordage.  When 
their  bark  was  furnished  they  set  sail.  Unluckily,  in  their  im- 
patience to  be  gone,  they  did  not  -reckon  what  supplies  they 
would  need.  The  wind,  at  first  favorable,  soon  turned  against 
them,  and  famine  stared  them  in  the  face.  Driven  to  the  last 
resort  of  starving  seamen,  they  cast  lots  for  a  victim,  and  the  lot 
by  a  strange  chance  fell  upon  the  very  man  whose  punishment 
had  been  a  chief  count  against  De  Pierria.  Life  was  supported 
by  this  hideous  relief  till  they  came  in  sight  of  the  French  coast. 
Even  then  their  troubles  were  not  over.  An  English  privateer 
bore  down  upon  them  and  captured  them.  The  miseries  of  the 
prisoners  seem,  in  some  measure,  to  have  touched  their  enemies. 
A  few  of  the  weakest  were  landed  on  French  soil.  The  rest 
ended  their  wanderings  in  an  English  prison. 

In  reality  the  settlers  had  not  been  forgotten  by  their  country- 
men. The  news  of  the  abandonment  of  the  colony  did  not 
The  colony  rea°h  France  till  long  after  the  event.     Before  its  ar- 

"^audon-  ™Va*    a   ^eet   WaS   Sent   0Ut  t0   t^ie   rene^  °f  tne  Colony. 

niere.«  Three  ships  were  dispatched,  the  largest  of  a  hundred 
and  twenty  tons,  the  least  of  sixty  tons,  under  the  command  of 
Rene  Laudonniere,  a  young  Poitevin  of  good  birth.  On  their 
outward  voyage  they  touched  at  Teneriffe  and  Dominica,  and 
found  ample  evidence  at  each  place  of  the  terror  which  the 
Spaniards  had  inspired  among  the  natives.  In  June  the  French 
reached  the  American  shore  south  of  Port  Royal.  As  before, 
their  reception  by  the  Indians  was  friendly.  Some  further  ex- 
ploration failed  to  discover  a  more  suitable  site  than  that  which 
had  first  presented  itself,  and  accordingly  a  wooden  fort  was  soon 

1  The  account  of  the  colony  during  Laudonniere's  period  of  office  is  taken  from  his  own 
letters.     They  were  translated  into  English,  and  published  in  Hakluyt's  collection. 


92  SPANISH  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 

built  with  a  timber  palisade  and  bastions  of  earthen  work.  Be- 
fore long  the  new-comers  found  that  their  intercourse  with  the 
Indians  was  attended  with  unlooked-for  difficulties.  There  were 
three  tribes  of  importance,  each  under  the  command  of  a  single 
chief,  and  all  more  or  less  hostile  one  to  the  other.  In  the  South 
the  power  of  the  chiefs  seems  to  have  been  far  more  dreaded, 
and  their  influence  over  the  national  policy  more  authoritative, 
than  among  the  tribes  of  New  England  and  Canada.  Laudon- 
niere,  with  questionable  judgment,  entangled  himself  in  these 
Indian  feuds,  and  entered  into  an  offensive  alliance  with  the  first 
of  these  chiefs  whom  he  encountered,  Satouriona. 

Before  he  was  called  on  to  fulfill  his  engagements  to  Satouriona, 
his  followers  had  established  friendly  relations  with  the  Thimagoa 
tribe,  the  very  enemies  against  whom  Satouriona  especially  de- 
sired the  help  of  the  French.  Ottigny,  one  of  Laudonniere's 
followers,  had  been  sent  out  on  an  exploring  party  and  had  pene- 
trated into  the  Thimagoa  country  and  had  friendly  dealings  with* 
the  inhabitants.  A  second  visit  under  the  command  of  one  Vas- 
seur  led  to  still  more  intimate  relations.  The  visitors  were  hospitably 
received  and  learned  tidings  of  a  land  beyond,  where  gold  and 
silver  were  so  plentiful  that  they  were  used  for  defensive  armor. 
It  was  clearly  the  interest  of  the  French  to  stand  well  with  all  the 
tribes  which  lay  between  them  and  this  rumored  El  Dorado,  and 
the  agreement  with  Satouriona  was  forgotten.  Nevertheless  upon 
Vasseur's  next  visit  to  Satouriona,  he  was  severely  cross-examined 
by  that  chief  as  to  the  object  of  his  late  journey,  and  only  satis- 
fied him  by  an  elaborate  account  of  a  purely  imaginary  attack 
upon  the  Thimagoas,  in  which  he  had  with  his  own  hand  slain  two 
of  his  enemies.  It  was  clear,  however,  that  Satouriona's  faith  in 
his  allies  was  shaken,  and  even  the  firmness  with  which  Laudon- 
niere  asserted  his  own  superiority  and  showed  his  contempt  for 
the  anger  of  the  savage  might  have  failed  of  its  object,  had  it  not 
been  seconded  by  a  storm  of  lightning  so  unparalleled  as  to  ex- 
cite a  belief  among  the  savages  that  it  was  a  special  contrivance 
of  the  white  man  for  their  destruction.  In  his  terror  Satouriona 
sent  a  messenger  to  implore  the  forbearance  of  Laudonniere,  and 
the  French  were,  for  the  time,  saved  from  the  wrath  of  their  dis- 
contented ally.  No  sooner  were  his  difficulties  with  the  savages 
over  than  Laudonniere's  life  was  in  trouble  from  his  own  follow- 
ers. If  Laudonniere's  own  account  is  to  be  trusted,  one  of  his 
men,  La  Roo/iette,  persuaded  his  comrades  that  he  was  endowed 


LA  UD ONNIERE'S  MISFOR  TUNES.  9 3 

with  supernatural  powers,  and  that  he  could  reveal  to  them  vast 
mines  of  precious  metals.  Accordingly,  they  demanded  to  be  at 
once  led  in  search  of  the  treasure.  Laudonniere  insisted  that  it 
was  at  least  necessary  to  finish  the  fort  before  departing.  The 
delay  so  enraged  the  would-be  gold-hunter  that  he  conspired  to 
destroy  Laudonniere  either  by  poison  or  by  blowing  him  up  in 
his  bed.  His  chief  accomplice  was  one  Le  Genre,  who  had,  as 
he  imagined,  received  some  slight  from '  Laudonniere,  but  who, 
unfortunately,  still  stood  high  in  his  esteem  and  was  employed  by 
him  as  a  sort  of  deputy  when  he  himself  was  incapacitated  by 
sickness.  The  plot  for  Laudonniere's  destruction  failed,  but  not 
long  after  some  of  the  discontented  men  seized  upon  the  two 
remaining  vessels  and  went  buccaneering  in  the  West  Indies, 
where  they  were  finally  captured  by  the  Spaniards,  an  event 
which  led  ultimately  to  the  destruction  of  the  colony.  Laudon- 
niere at  once  set  to  work  to  repair  his  loss  by  building  two  ves- 
sels, but  the  labor  which  this  entailed  was  treated  as  a  grievance. 
Soon  the  men,  emboldened  by  Laudonniere's  illness,  broke  into 
open  mutiny,  imprisoned  their  commander  and  extorted  from  him 
a  passport,  and  then,  taking  two  vessels  and  all  the  ammunition, 
set  sail  with  vague  schemes  of  enriching  themselves  by  piracy  in 
the  Spanish  Main.  They  took  a  rich  prize,  but  through  their 
own  carelessness  and  folly  it  was  recaptured,  and  at  last  the  chief 
part  of  them  returned,  terrified  and  ashamed  if  not  repentant,  and 
submitted  themselves  to  Laudonniere.  Two  of  the  ringleaders 
were  put  to  death,  the  rest  received  a  free  pardon.  Henceforth, 
though  we  hear  at  times  of  disaffection,  there  was  no  open  out- 
break. 

A  new  source  of  trouble,  however,  soon  beset  the  unhappy 
colonists.  Their  quarrels  had  left  them  no  time  for  tilling  the  soil, 
Hawkins's  anc^  tney  were  wn°lty  dependent  on  the  Indians  for 
visit.  food.     The  friendship  of  the  savages  soon  proved  but 

a  precarious  means  of  support.  The  dissensions  in  the  French 
camp  must  have  lowered  the  new-comers  in  the  eyes  of  their 
savage  neighbors.  They  would  only  part  with  their  supplies  on 
exorbitant  terms.  Laudonniere  himself  throughout  would  have 
adopted  moderate  and  conciliatory  measures,  but  his  men  at  length 
became  impatient  and  seized  one  of  the  principal  Indian  chiefs 
as  a  hostage  for  the  good  behavior  of  his  countrymen.  A 
skirmish  ensued,  in  which  the  French  were  victorious.  It  was 
clear,  however,  that  the  settlement  could  not  continue  to  depend  on 


94  SPANISH  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 

supplies  extorted  from  the  Indians  at  the  point  of  the  sword.  The 
settlers  felt  that  they  were  wholly  forgotten  by  their  friends  in 
France,  and  they  decided,  though  with  heavy  hearts,  to  forsake 
the  country  which  they  had  suffered  so  much  to  win.  With  such 
resources  as  they  had,  a  ship  was  made  ready,  but  before  she 
could  be  launched  a  sail  appeared  in  sight.  The  new-comer  was 
neither  a  friend  from  France  nor  an  enemy  from  Spain,  but  an 
English  vessel  under  the  command  of  John  Hawkins.  He  had 
just  returned  from  an  errand  better  befitting  a  worse  man,  from 
kidnapping  negroes  on  the  coast  of  Guinea  to  sell  among  the 
Spaniards  on  the  West  India  islands.  He  was  at  once  received 
with  such  hospitality  as  the  meagre  resources  of  the  colony  could 
offer,  and  Laudonniere  killed  in  his  honor  some  of  the  sheep  and 
poultry  which  he  had  been  carefully  preserving  to  stock  his  set- 
tlement. The  Englishman  was  not  backward  in  the  interchange 
of  good  offices.  He  offered  the  French  a  passage  which  they 
despised,  and  then  sold  them  a -vessel  and  a  supply  of  wine  and 
biscuits.  Laudonniere  gave  him  in  exchange  the  cannon  of  the 
fort,  now  become'  useless,  and  prudently  concealed  the  fact  that 
he  had  discovered  silver.  As  soon  as  the  English  had  set  sail, 
the  colonists  proceeded  to  demolish  their  fortifications  lest  any 
foreign  intruder  should  occupy  them.  Just,  however,  as  all 
preparations  for  departure  were  made,  the  long-expected  help 
came.  Ribault  arrived  from  France  with  a  fleet  of  seven  vessels 
containing  three  hundred  settlers  and  ample  supplies.  This 
arrival  was  not  a  source  of  unmixed  joy  to  Laudonniere.  His 
factious  followers  had  sent  home  calumnious  reports  about  him, 
and  Ribault  brought  out  orders  to  send  him  home  to  France  to 
stand  his  trial.  Ribault  himself  seems  to  have  been  easily  per- 
suaded of  the  falsity  of  the  charges,  and  pressed  Laudonniere  to 
keep  his  command;  but  he,  broken  in  spirit  and  sick  in  body, 
declined  to  resume  office. 

All  disputes  soon  disappeared  in  the  face  of  a  vast  common 
misfortune.  Whatever  internal  symptoms  of  weakness  might 
Spanish  already  display  themselves  in  the  vast  fabric  of  the 
designs.  Spanish  empire,  its  rulers  showed  as  yet  no  lack  of 
jealous  watchfulness  against  any  attempts  to  rival  her  successes 
in  America.  The  attempts  of  Cartier  and  Roberval  had  been 
watched,  and  the  Spanish  ambassador  at  Lisbon  had  proposed  to 
the  king  of  Portugal  to  send  out  a  joint  armament  to  dispossess 
the  intruders.     The  king  deemed  the  danger  too  remote  to  be 


SPANISH  DESIGNS  AGAINST  THE  COLONY. 


95 


worth  an  expedition,  and  the  Spaniards  unwillingly  acquiesced. 
An  outpost  of  fur  traders  in  the  ice-bound  wilderness  of  Canada 
might  seem  to  bring  little  danger  with  it.  But  a  settlement  on 
the  coast  of  Florida,  within  some  eight  days'  sail  of  Havannah,  with 
a  harbor  whence  privateers  might  waylay  Spanish  ships  and  even 
attack  Spanish  colonies,  was  a  rival  not  to  be  endured.  Moreover, 
the  colonists  were  not  only  foreigners  but  Huguenots,  and  their 
heresy  served  at  once  as  a  pretext  and  stimulus  to  Spanish  zeal. 

The  man  to  whose  lot  it  fell  to  support  the  monopoly  of  Spain 
against  French  aggression,  was  one  who,  if  we  may  judge  by  his 
Pedro  de  American  career,  needed  only  a  wider  field  to  rival 
Menendez.i  tjie  genjus  an(j  the  atrocities  of  Alva.  Pedro  de 
Menendez,  when  he  had  scarcely  passed  from  boyhood,  had 
fought  both  against  the  French  and  the  Turks,  and  had  visited 
America  and  returned  laden  with  wealth.  He  then  did  good 
service  in  command  of  the  Spanish  fleet  in  the  French  war,  and 
his  prompt  co-operation  with  the  land  force  gave  him  a  share  in 
the  glories  of  St.  Quentin.  A  second  voyage  to  America  was 
even  more  profitable  than  the  first,  but  his  misconduct  there 
brought  him  into  conflict  with  the  Council  of  the  Indies,  by  whom 
he  was  imprisoned,  and  heavily  fined.  His  previous  services, 
however,  had  gained  him  the  favor  of  the  court.  Part  of  his  fine 
was  remitted,  and  he  was  emboldened  to  ask  not  merely  for 
pardon,  but  for  promotion.  He  proposed  to  revive  the  attempt 
of  De  Soto  and  to  extend  the  Spanish  power  over  Florida.  The 
expedition  was  to  be  at  Menendez's  own  cost,  he  was  to  take  out 
five  hundred  colonists,  and  in  return  to  be  made  Governor  of 
Florida  for  life  and  to  enjoy  certain  rights  of  free  trade  with  the 
West  Indies  and  with  the  mother  country. 

Before  Menendez  had  completed  his  preparations,  news  came 
which  gave  the  whole  affair  a  fresh  color.     It  would  seem  that 
Treachery    when  the  king  invested  Menendez  with  the  governor-    ; 
French        sniP  of  Florida,  both  were  under  the  belief  that  it  was  <^ 
court.  a  vacant  territory.     Suddenly  there  came  a  report  that 

a  colony  of  French  Huguenots  had  already  occupied  the  best 
harbor  on  the  coast  of  Florida,  and  that  a  fleet  of  seven  ships, 
well  manned  and  supplied,  was  sailing  to  their  support.  It  was 
from  no  watchful  Spaniard,  jealous  for  the  exclusive  possession  of 
the  New  World,  that  the  warning  came.     Those  who  betrayed 

1  Parkman,  p.  87.  His  account  is  based  on  the  original  dispatches  of  Menendez,  pre- 
served in  the  Spanish  Archives. 


96  SPANJSJf  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 

Ribault  were  the  very  rulers  of  that  country  which  he  and  his 
followers  were  striving  loyally  to  serve. 

For  four  generations  the  throne  of  St.  Lewis  had  been  filled 
by  vain  triflers,  whose  vices  were  varied  only  by  the  fitful  energy 
and  tawdry  ambition  of  Francis  I.  A  lower  depth  still  was 
reached  when  the  Italian  craft  and  cruelty  of  the  Medici  was 
grafted  on  the  heartless  and  lustful  stock  of  the  Valois.  Noth- 
ing could  show  more  fully  the  depth  of  degradation  to  which  the 
French  court  had  sunk  than  its  betrayal  of  Ribault.  Whatever 
were  the  crimes  of  the  Spaniard,  he  never  at  least  forgot  his  pride 
of  race ;  his  worst  deeds  were  gilded  by  some  show  of  patriot- 
ism. It  was  left  for  the  French  court  to  thwart  an  enterprise  in 
which  the  best  interests  of  the  nation  were  at  stake,  and  to  deliver 
up  the  bravest  of  its  subjects  to  a  cruel  and  dishonorable  death. 
The  precise  details  of  that  foul  compact,  like  so  much  of  the 
dark  career  of  Catherine  of  Medici  and  her  sons,  are  unknown 
to  us.  But  it  was  believed  by  those  best  fitted  to  judge,  that  the 
Spanish  king  was  kept  informed  of  Ribault's  movements  by  the 
French  government.  It  is  certain,  too,  that  Spain  had  neither 
resistance  nor,  for  a  while,  retaliation  to  fear,  and  that  when  a 
Frenchman  arose  to  avenge  the  wrongs  of  his  countrymen  and 
the  insult  to  the  national  flag,  his  own  governmeht  treated  the 
deed  as  a  crime. 

The  military  genius  of  Menendez  rose  to  the  new  demands 
made  upon  it.  He  at  once  decided  on  a  bold  and  comprehen- 
Destrudtion  s^ve  scheme,  which  would  secure  the  whole  coast  from 
French  Port  Royal  to  the  Chesapeake  Bay,  and  would  ulti- 
coiony.  mately  give  Spain  exclusive  possession  of  the  South 
Seas  and  the  Newfoundland  fisheries.  The  Spanish  captain  had 
a  mind  which  could  at  once  conceive  a  wide  scheme  and  labor  at 
the  execution  of  details.  So  resolutely  were  operations  carried 
on  that  by  June,  1565,  Menendez  sailed  from  Cadiz  with  thirty- 
four  vessels  and  two  thousand  six  hundred  men.  After  a  stormy 
voyage  he  reached  the  mouth  of  the  St.  John's  river.  Ribault's 
party  was  about  to  land,  and  some  of  the  smaller  vessels  had 
crossed  the  harbor,  while  others  yet  stood  out  to  sea.  Menendez 
hailed  the  latter,  and  after  some  parley  told  them  that  he  had 
come  there  with  orders  from  the  king  of  Spain  to  kill  all  intruders 
that  might  be  found  on  the  coast.  The  French,  being  too  few  to 
fight,  fled.  Menendez  did  not  for  the  present  attack  the  settle- 
ment, but  sailed  southward  till  he  reached  a  harbor  which  he 


DESTRUCTION  OF  THE  FRENCH  COLONY.  97 

named  St.  Augustine.  There  the  Spaniards  disembarked  and 
threw  up  a  fortification  destined  to  grow  into  the  town  of  St. 
Augustine,  the  first  permanent  Spanish  settlement  north  of  the 
Gulf  of  Mexico.  Various  attempts  had  been  made,  and  with 
various  motives.  The  slave-hunter,  the  gold-seeker,  the  explorer, 
had  each  tried  his  fortunes  in  Florida,  and  each  failed.  The  dif- 
ficulties which  had  baffled  them  all  were  at  length  overcome  by 
the  spirit  of  religious  hatred. 

Meanwhile  a  council  of  war  was  sitting  at  the  French  settle- 
ment, Charlefort.  Ribault,  contrary  to  the  wishes  of  Laudon- 
niere  and  the  rest,  decided  to  anticipate  the  Spaniards  by  an 
attack  from  the  sea.  A  few  sick  men  were  left  with  Laudon- 
niere  to  garrison  the  fort ;  all  the  rest  went  on  board.  Just  as 
everything  was  ready  for  the  attack,  a  gale  sprang  up,  and  the 
fleet  of  Ribault,  instead  of  bearing  down  on  St.  Augustine,  was 
straggling  in  confusion  off  an  unknown  and  perilous  coast.  Me- 
nendez,  relieved  from  immediate  fear  for  his  own  settlement,  de- 
termined on  a  bold  stroke.  Like  Ribault,  he  bore  down  the  op- 
position of  a  cautious  majority,  and,  with  five  hundred  picked 
men,  marched  overland  through  thirty  miles  of  swamp  and  jungle 
against  the  French  fort.  Thus  each  commander  was  exposing 
his  own  settlement  in  order  to  menace  his  enemies.  In  judging* 
however,  of  the  relative  prudence  of  the  two  plans,  it  must  be 
remembered  that  an  attack  by  land  is  far  more  under  control, 
and  far  less  liable  to  be  disarranged  by  unforeseen  chances,  than 
one  by  sea.  At  first  it  seemed  as  if  each  expedition  was  des- 
tined to  the  same  fate.  The  weather  was  as  unfavorable  to  the 
Spaniards  by  land  as  to  the  French  by  sea.  At  one  time  a  mu- 
tiny was  threatened,  but  Menendez  succeeded  in  inspiring  his 
men  with  something  of  his  own  enthusiasm,  and  they  persevered. 
Led  by  a  French  deserter,  they  approached  the  unprotected  set- 
tlement. So  stormy  was  the  night  that  the  sentinels  had  left  the 
walls.  The  fort  was  stormed;  Laudonniere  and  a  few  others  es- 
caped to  the  shore  and  were  picked  up  by  one  of  Ribault's  ves- 
sels returning  from  its  unsuccessful  expedition.  The  rest,  to  the 
number  of  one  hundred  and  forty,  were  slain  in  the  attack  or  taken 
prisoners.  The  women  and  children  were  spared,  the  men  were 
hung  on  trees  with  an  inscription  pinned  to  their  breasts :  "  Not 
as  to  Frenchmen,  but  as  to  Lutherans." 

The  fate  of  Ribault's  party  was  equally  wretched.  All  were 
shipwrecked,  but  most  apparently  succeeded  in  landing  alive. 

7 


98 


SPANISH  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 


Then  began  a  scene  of  deliberate  butchery,  aggravated,  if  the 
French  accounts  may  be  believed,  by  the  most  shameless  treach- 
ery. As  the  scattered  bands  of  shipwrecked  men  wandered 
through  the  forest,  seeking  to  return  to  Fort  Caroline,  they  were 
mercilessly  entrapped  by  friendly  words,  if  not  by  explicit  prom- 
ises of  safety.  Some  escaped  to  the  Indians,  a  few  were  at  last 
spared  by  the  contemptuous  mercy  of  their  foes.  Those  of  the 
survivors  who  professed  themselves  converts  were  pardoned,  the 
rest  were  sent  to  the  galleys.  Ribault  himself  was  among  the 
murdered.  If  we  may  believe  the  story  current  in  France,  his 
head  sawn  in  four  parts  was  set  up  over  the  corners  of  the  fort 
at  St.  Augustine,  while  a  piece  of  his  beard  was  sent  as  a  trophy 
to  the  king  of  Spain. 

As  might  have  been  expected,  all  attempts  to  rouse  the  French 
court  into  demanding  redress  were  vain.  Spain,  above  all  other 
Dominic  de  nations,  knew  the  arts  by  which  a  corrupt  court  might 
Gourgues.i  ^e  swayedj  and  the  same  intrigues,  which  fifty  years 
later  sent  Raleigh  to  the  block  and  well-nigh  ended  the  young 
colony  of  Virginia,  now  kept  France  quiet.  But  though  the  court 
refused  to  move,  an  avenger  was  not  wanting.  Dominic  de 
Gourgues  had  already  known  as  a  prisoner  of  war  the  horrors  of 
the  Spanish  galleys.  Whether  he  was  a  Huguenot  is  uncertain. 
Happily  in  France,  as  the  history  of  that  and  all  later  ages  proved, 
the  religion  of  the  Catholic  did  not  necessarily  deaden  the  feel- 
ings of  the  patriot.  Seldom  has  there  been  a  deed  of  more  reck- 
less daring  than  that  which  Dominic  de  Gourgues  now  undertook. 
With  the  proceeds  of  his  patrimony  he  bought  three  small  ships, 
manned  by  eighty  sailors  and  a  hundred  men-at-arms.  He  then 
obtained  a  commission  as  a  slaver  on  the  coast  of  Guinea,  and 
in  the  summer  of  1567  set  sail.  With  these  paltry  resources  he 
aimed  at  overthrowing  a  settlement  which  had  already  destroyed 
a  force  of  twenty  times  his  number,  and  which  might  have  been 
strengthened  in  the  interval.  Moreover,  even  if  there  had  not 
been  the  fate  of  Ribault  to  warn  him,  he  would  have  known  that 
nothing  but  a  victory  against  vast  odds  could  save  him  from  cer- 
tain destruction.  He  was  defying  his  own  government,  and 
righteous  though  his  undertaking  was,  yet  by  human  law  he  was 
a  mere  pirate  attacking  a  friendly  nation  in  time  of  peace.  To 
the  mass  of  his  followers  he  did  not  reveal  the  true  secret  of  his 


1  Parkman,  p.   140.     His  account  is  taken  from  a  MS.  narrative  written  by  De  Gourgues 
himself,  and  preserved  in  his  family. 


DOMINIC  DE  GOURGUES. 


99 


voyage  till  he  had  reached  the  West  Indies.  Then  he  disclosed 
his  real  purpose.  His  men  were  of  the  same  spirit  as  their  leader. 
Desperate  though  the  enterprise  seemed,  De  Gourgues's  only  dif- 
ficulty was  to  restrain  his  followers  from  undue  haste.  Happily 
for  their  attempt,  they  had  allies  on  whom  they  had  not  reck- 
oned. The  fickle  savages  had  at  first  welcomed  the  Spaniards^ 
but  the  tyranny  of  the  new-comers  soon  wrought  a  change,  and 
the  Spaniards  in  Florida,  like  the  Spaniards  in  every  part  of  the 
New  World,  were  looked  on  as  hateful  tyrants.  So  when  De 
Gourgues  landed  he  at  once  found  a  ready  body  of  allies.  Fore- 
most in  his  display  of  zeal  was  Laudonniere's  old  friend  Satouri- 
ona.  De  Gourgues,  with  tact  and  judgment  not  less  striking 
than  his  courage,  told  the  Indians  that  he  had  merely  come  to 
reconnoitre,  but  that  the  sight  of  their  injuries  and  the  hope  of 
their  alliance  had  decided  him  on  an  immediate  attack.  The 
gift  of  a  few  shirts,  garments  which  seem  to  have  specially  charmed 
the  imagination  of  the  savage,  clenched  the  alliance,  and  Satou- 
riona  testified  his  fidelity  by  giving  his  favorite  wife  and  his  only 
son  as  hostages.  Three  days  were  spent  in  making  ready,  and 
then  De  Gourgues,  with  a  hundred  and  sixty  of  his  own  men  and 
his  Indian  allies,  marched  against  the  enemy.  In  spite  of  the 
hostility  of  the  Indians,  the  Spaniards  seem  to  have  taken  no 
precaution  against  a  sudden  attack.  Menendez  himself  had  left 
the  colony.  The  Spanish  force  was  divided  between  three  forts, 
and  no  proper  precautions  were  taken  for  keeping  up  the  com- 
munications between  them.  Each  was  successively  seized,  the 
garrison  slain  or  made  prisoners,  and  as  each  fort  fell,  those  in  the 
next  could  only  make  vague  guesses  as  to  the  extent  of  the  dan- 
ger. Even  when  divided  into  three  the  Spanish  force  outnum- 
bered that  of  De  Gourgues,  and  savages  with  bows  and  arrows 
would  have  counted  for  little  against  men  with  firearms  and  be- 
hind walls.  But  after  the  downfall  of  the  first  fort  a  panic  seemed 
to  seize  the  Spaniards,  and  the  French  achieved  an  almost  blood- 
less victory.  After  the  death  of  Ribault  and  his  followers  noth- 
ing could  be  looked  for  but  merciless  retaliation,  and  De  Gour- 
gues copied  the  severity,  though  not  the  perfidy,  of  his  enemies. 
The  very  details  of  Menendez's  act  were  imitated,  and  the  trees 
on  which  the  men  were  hung  bore  the  inscription:  "Not  as 
Spaniards,  but  as  traitors,  robbers,  and  murderers."  Five  weeks 
later  De  Gourgues  anchored  under  the  walls  of  Rochelle,  and 
that  noble  city,  where  civil  and  religious  freedom  found  a  home 


too 


SPANISH  AND  FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 


in  their  darkest  hour,  received  him  with  the  honor  he  deserved. 
As  might  have  been  expected,  the  court  frowned  on  him,  and  it 
even  seemed  for  a  while  as  if  he  were  in.  danger  of  being  given 
up  to  Spain.  Stupendous  as  such  a  crime  would  have  been,  it 
would  probably  have  seemed  light  to  the  French  court.  But  his 
» exploit  did  not  lack  its  reward.  The  English  queen  sought  to 
enlist  in  her  service  one  whose  exploits  rivaled  those  of  Drake 
and  Grenville,  and  when  he  died  he  was  on  the  point  of  com- 
manding the  Portuguese  fleet  against  his  old  enemies. 

His  attack  did  not  wholly  extirpate  the  Spanish  power  in  Flor- 
ida. Menendez  received  the  blessing  of  the  Pope  as  a  chosen 
instrument  for  the  conversion  of  the  Indians,  returned  to  Amer- 
ica and  restored  his  settlement.  As  before,  he  soon  made  the 
Indians  his  deadly  enemies.  The  Spanish  settlement  held  on,  but 
it  was  not  till  two  centuries  later  that  its  existence  made  itself  re- 
membered by  one  brief  but  glorious  episode  in  the  history  of  the 
English  colonies. 

Thus  by  a  strange  fate  Frenchman  and  Spaniard  were  rending 
one  another  asunder,  only  for  the  benefit  of  a  nation  whom  the 
one  regarded  as  her  oldest  hereditary  foe,  the  other  as  the  vilest  of 
heretics.  Had  not  Menendez  swept  away  the  colony  of  Ribault, 
the  danger  which  Chatham  anticipated  and  met  two  centuries  later 
might  have  come  upon  the  English  colonies  in  their  infancy. 
They  might  have  found  themselves  hemmed  in  by  a  vast  belt  of 
French  outposts  along  the  valleys  of  the  Mississippi,  the  Ohio, 
and  the  St.  Lawrence.  To  those  petty  settlements  on  the  Atlan- 
tic sea-board  that  might  have  seemed  a  slight  and  almost  vision- 
ary danger.  Later  events  showed  that  it  might  have  changed 
the  whole  history  of  America  and  of  the  world. 

The  danger  of  Spanish  aggression  was  a  slighter  one.  The 
incurable  vices  of  the  national  character  and  the  inevitable  hos- 
tility of  the  Indians  must  ever  have  checked  the  extension  of  the 
Spanish  colonies  northwards.  Yet  a  strong  Spanish  outpost  on 
the  coast  of  Florida  might  have  been  a  constant  source  of  weak- 
ness and  peril  to  the  southern  colonies  of  England,  and  from  that 
they  were  saved  by  the  sword  of  De  Gourgues. 


UNIVERSITY 

CHAPTER  VI. 

THE   VIRGINIA   COMPANY.1 

The  task  in  which  Gilbert  and  Raleigh  had  failed  was  forced 
upon  England  by  the  pressure  of  social  and  religious  difficulties. 
increased  Virginia  was  the  offspring  of  economical  distress,  as 
cofonfzL  New  England  was  of  ecclesiastical  conflicts.  During 
tion.  the  whole  of  the  sixteenth  century,  while  England  grew 

in  external  splendor  and  greatness,  there  was  beneath  the  surface 
an  ever-increasing  mass  of  distress  and  discontent.     It  is  very 

1  Our  authorities  for  the  history  of  the  Virginia  Company,  and  of  the  colony  under  the 
Company,  are  numerous  and  scattered.  The  only  contemporary  writer  who  can  be  fairly  called 
a  historian  is  John  Smith,  the  author  of  the  History  of  Virginia,  of  which  the  first  edition 
was  published  in  London  in  1624.  Smith  also  wrote  two  earlier  and  smaller  works:  one,  en- 
titled A  true  Relation  0/ Virginia,  published  in  160S,  the  other,  A  Map  of  Virginia,  with  a 
Description  of  the  Country,  in  1612.  Both  have  been  re-edited  in  recent  times  by  Mr. 
Charles  Deane,  a  well-known  Boston  antiquary.  I  have  discussed  the  whole  question  of 
Smith's  credibility  elsewhere.     See  Appendix  E. 

Of  later  writers  the  chief  is  Stith,  a  Virginian  clergyman,  who  wrote  in  1747.  His  History 
of  Virginia,  though  somewhat  diffuse  and  disproportionate,  is  written  in  a  singularly  digni- 
fied and  at  times  animated  style,  and  shows  a  clear  understanding  of  his  subject.  Unfortun- 
ately the  book  only  comes  down  to  the  dissolution  of  the  Virginia  Company.  He  relies 
largely  on  Smith,  and  he  also  evidently  had  access  to  the  Archives  of  the  Company.  The 
vicissitudes  through  which  these  papers  passed,  and  the  manner  of  their  preservation,  will 
come  before  us  in  the  course  of  the  narrative.  They  contain  an  immense  mass  of  information 
as  to  the  proceedings  of  the  Company  and  the  industry  and  social  life  of  the  colony.  After 
being  long  overlooked,  they  have  been  recently  unearthed  by  Mr.  Edward  D.  Neill,  who  has 
published  copious  extracts  from  them,  with  a  comment,  in  a  work  entitled  The  Virginia 
Company.  Mr.  Neill  has  also  published  a  book  containing  much  information,  though  in  a 
somewhat  crftde  form,  called  The  English  Colonization  of  America.  I  shall  refer  to  the  lat- 
ter book  by  the  name  of  the  author,  to  the  former  as  The  Virginia  Company. 

Beverley's  History  of  Virginia,  written  in  1705,  is  a  book  of  some  merit,  but  of  no  special 
authority  for  early  times,  though,  like  Stith's,  it  probably  here  and  there  embodies  colonial 
traditions  of  value.  It  is  written  in  a  lively,  unpretending  style,  and  is  of  value  for  the  poli- 
tics of  later  times.  An  improved  edition  was  published  in  London  in  T722.  It  is  to  this  that 
I  refer.     Besides  these  we  have  some  letters  in  Purchas. 

A  great  amount  of  our  material  is  to  be  found  in  pamphlets,  letters,  and  memoranda. 
Some  of  these  are  published  in  Peter  Force's  collection  of  American  tracts,  published  at 
Washington  in  1836,  a  work  of  inestimable  value  to  the  student  of  American  history.  Others 
are  among  the  "  State  Papers  "  edited  by  Mr.  Sainsbury.     As  to  the  latter,  I  have  in  almost 

IOI 


I02  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

difficult,  in  dealing  with  a  period  of  imperfect  statistics  and  yet 
more  imperfect  economical  knowledge,  to  arrive  at  any  clear 
conclusion  on  questions  of  this  nature.  Much  allowance,  too, 
must  be  made  for  the  tendency  of  every  age,  especially  of  an 
age  which  has  just  gone  through  great  changes,  to  look  back  to 
a  golden  time,  golden  only  in  memory.  Of  this,  however,  we 
may  be  sure  :  poverty,  discontent,  and  distress  were  becoming 
such  prominent  evils  as  to  alarm  every  thoughtful  man.  This 
may  have  been  in  some  measure  due,  not  to  any  actual  deteriora- 
tion in  the  state  of  the  peasantry,  but  to  the  improvement  in  the 
state  of  those  above  them.  The  peasant  was  not  worse  off  posi- 
tively, but  he  was  so  relatively.  He  had  at  best  remained  sta- 
tionary, while  other  classes,  especially  the  class  next  above  him, 
had  advanced.  Between  the  beginning  and  end  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  the  habits  of  the  English  farmer  had  completely  changed. 
He  was  better  fed  and  lodged.  We  read  how  stone  houses  with 
chimneys  had  taken  the  place  of  mud  hovels ;  how  the  yoeman 
or  tenant-farmer  no  longer  slept  on  a  coarse  straw  pallet  with  a 
log  for  a  bolster ;  how  a  silver  salt-cellar  and  drinking-cup  stood 
on  his  table  where  there  had  formerly  been  a  solitary  dish  of 
pewter;  how  he  would  have  six  or  seven  years'  rent  lying  by, 
while  before  he  had,  as  often  as  not,  to  sell  a  cow  before  he  could 
pay  his  landlord.1  Meanwhile  the  condition  of  the  peasantry 
had  become,  if  anything,  worse.  Population  was  nearly  if  not 
quite  doubled.2  The  rise  in  wages  had  not  kept  pace  with  the 
enormous  rise  in  the  price  of  food.3  The  discontent  thus  engen- 
dered must  have  been  intensified  by  the  spectacle  of  an  increase 
of  comfort  in  which  a  whole  class  had  no  share.  Moreover,  the 
system  of  dealing  with  land  had  been  revolutionized,  and  the 
revolution  was  one  which  did  not  spare  the  interests  of  the  peas- 
ant. It  is  well  known  that  throughout  the  reign  of  Henry  and 
his  three  children,  an  incessant  war  was  waged  by  the  legislature 
against  the  landholders,  to  check  the  conversion  of  arable  land 


every  case  carefully  examined  the  original  MS.     The  voyages  at  the  opening  of  the  century 
are  told  in  Hakluyt  and  Purchas. 

It  is  scarcely  needful  to  dwell  on  the  value  of  Mr.  Sainsbury's  Calendars  of  State  Papers 
as  materials  not  only  for  the  history  of  Virginia,  but  for  that  of  the  colonies  at  large.  With- 
out them  a  vast  mine  of  information  would  have  been  virtually  closed  against  me.  I  refer  to 
them  throughout  as  "Colonial  Papers,"  appending  the  year,  and,  when  known,  the  exact 
date. 

»  Harrison's  Description  of  Britain,  published  in  Holinshed's  Chronicle,  ed.  1586,  vol.  i.  p. 
188. 

1  This  is  the  general  conclusion  at  which  I  have  arrived  from  a  comparison  of  authorities. 
*  I  take  this  estimate  from  Eden's  State  of  the  Poor,  vol.  i.  p.  74,  et  passing 


NEED  FOR  COLONIZATION.  103 

into  grass.  As  large  fortunes  were  made  in  trade,  and  as  the 
restrictions  on  the  alienation  of  real  property  were  modified, 
land  was  more  and  more  treated  as  an  ordinary  mercantile  com- 
modity. Merchant  families,  like  the  Greshams,  became  large 
landed  proprietors.  Such  a  class,  we  cannot  doubt,  dealt  with 
land  in  a  far  more  commercial  spirit,  and  with  less  regard  proba- 
bly for  the  peasantry,  than  those  whom  they  succeeded.  The 
tendency  to  throw  land  out  of  cultivation,  and  to  replace  tillage 
by  sheep  farming,  a  tendency  which  was  ever  increasing,  must 
have  had  a  serious  effect  on  the  peasant.  The  liberated  capital 
might,  indeed,  supply  occupation  for  labor  elsewhere,  but  even 
in  the  present  day  we  know  how  needful  it  is  that  labor  should 
have  its  market  brought  to  its  very  doors,  and  we  may  well  be- 
lieve that  to  a  peasant  in  the  sixteenth  century  a  change  of  abode 
would  seem  like  emigration  into  another  world.  In  some  cases 
it  would  seem  that  such  a  change  was  not  a  matter  of  choice. 
We  read  how  "  men  ejected  from  their  holdings  prowled  about 
as  idle  beggars  or  continued  as  stark  thieves  till  the  gallows  did 
eat  them." l  The  dissolution  of  the  monasteries,  too,  had  tended 
in  various  ways  to  increase  these  evils.  It  had  thrown  a  vast 
number  of  persons  on  the  world  in  search  of  employment;  it  had 
freed  a  class  from  celibacy  and  thereby  increased  population ; 
and  it  had  brought  to  a  crisis  that  pauperism  which  the  religious 
houses  had  fostered,  while  they  kept  it  from  becoming  an  imme- 
diate source  of  danger.  The  changed  habits  of  the  upper  classes 
contributed  to  the  same  results.  London  was  no  longer  merely 
the  political  and  commercial  centre  of  the  kingdom ;  it  had  be- 
come a  place  of  fashionable  resort,  supplied  with  the  latest  vices 
from  France  and  Italy.  There  the  prodigal  from  the  country 
might  squander  his  substance  in  riotous  living  at  the  gaming 
table  or  the  ordinary,  and  then  sink  into  the  bully  or  sharper. 
The  soldier  of  fortune,  the  Sharpe  or  Lurcher  with  whom  the 
dramatists  of  that  age  have  familiarized  us,  was  the  natural  pro- 
duct of  such  a  time.  The  Low  Countries,  too,  sent  disbanded 
soldiers  to  swell  the  ranks  of  the  dangerous  class.  No  wonder 
that  the  community  swarmed  with  those  described  by  a  contem- 
porary writer  as  "  the  rioter  that  hath  consumed  all,  and  the 
vagabond  that  will  abide  nowhere,  but  runneth  up  and  down 
seeking  work  and  finding  none;"2  or  in  an  order  of  the  Privy 
Council,  as  "  those  that  go  in  good  clothes  and  fare  well,  and 

1  Harrison,  p.  183.  2  Ibid.,  p.  182. 


I04  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 

none  know  whereof  they  live." l  An  earlier  age  had  dealt  with 
the  problem  in  a  fashion  of  its  own.  But  though  a  system 
which  involved  the  execution  of  seventy-two  thousand  criminals 
in  thirty  years  might. satisfy  Thomas  Cromwell  and  his  royal  mas- 
ter, the  generation  which  followed  shrank  from  such  heroic  rem- 
edies. Colonization  was  an  obvious  palliative,  and  the  statesmen 
of  the  seventeenth  century  eagerly  availed  themselves  of  it.2 

At  first  sight  it  would  seem  as  if  the  temper  of  the  age  had 
undergone  a  change  unfavorable  to  the  prospects  of  colonization. 
Altered  That  short-lived  impulse  of  heroism,  which  a  genera- 
co?oni°a-  tion  earlier  had  led  Englishmen  to  defy  the  dangers  of 
tion.  frozen  seas  and  Spanish  galleys,  hacl  died  away.     There 

was  no  place  for  men  like  Drake  or  Hawkins  under  a  king  who 
hated  war  and  respected  Spain.  Yet  in  reality  the  change  was  a 
gain.  The  spirit  which  set  on  foot  raids  against  Spanish  po'rts 
and  gold-quests  like  that  undertaken  by  Lane,  was  probably 
needed  as  a  pioneer  to  clear  the  way  for  colonization,  but  it  was 
a  hindrance  to  the  actual  work  of  the  colonist.  Not  the  least 
important  among  the  many  causes  which  have  made  the  colonial 
history  of  England  and  Spain  so  widely  different  has  been  the 
fact  that  in  the  former  the  period  of  exploration  and  settlement 
coincided,  while  in  the  latter  they  were  kept  distinct.  The  ver- 
satile, restless,  enterprising  temper  which  fits  men  for  the  one 
task  is  in  itself  an  obstacle  to  them  in  the  other.  The  English- 
men to  whose  lot  the  task  of  settling  America  fell  were  far  less 
romantic  and  interesting  figures  than  the  generation  which  pre- 
ceded them,  but  they  were  fitter  instruments  for  the  specific  work 
in  hand. 

The  changed  temper  of  the  age  was  shown  in  the  humbler  and 
less  ambitious  efforts  with  which  its  colonization  opened.  For 
Mace's  twelve  years  after  White's  last  voyage  there  seems  to 
voyage.*  have  been  a  complete  lull.  Then  a  fresh  era  of  Ameri-  I 
can  voyages  opened,  but  with  hopes  and  ideas  that  would  have 
seemed  tame  and  spiritless  to  the  followers  of  Frobisher  and  Gil- 
bert. In  1602  two  voyages,  each  of  a  single  ship,  were  made  to 
Virginia.  One  was  fitted  out  by  Raleigh,  solely  in  the  hope  of 
recovering  his  lost  colonists.     Determined  not  to  be  baffled  by 

1  Quoted  by  Eden,  i.  157. 

2  A  sermon  preached  by  William  Symonds  at  Bow  Church,  and  quoted  by  Mr.  Neill  (p.  29), 
illustrates  clearly  the  connection  between  the  distress  and  crime  of  the  day  and  the  need  for 
colonization. 

8  A  short  account  of  the  voyage  is  given  by  Purchas,  iv.  i£53. 


VOYAGES  TO   VI R GIN  J A.  105 

the  ill-timed  love  of  adventure  which  had  thwarted  his  earlier 
efforts,  he  adopted  a  different  plan,  and  instead  of  commissioning 
a  ship  for  the  task,  and  leaving  the  arrangements  to  the  captain's 
own  discretion,  he  bought  a  ship  of  his  own  and  hired  a  crew 
himself,  placing  over  it  one  Samuel  Mace,  of  Weymouth,  de- 
scribed as  an  "  honest  sober  man,"  who  had  twice  sailed  to  Vir- 
ginia. This  change  of  plan,  however,  did  no  good.  Mace  sailed 
from  Weymouth  in  March,  and  reached  the  coast  of  America  at 
a  point  forty  leagues  southwest  of  Cape  Haterask.  The  crew, 
according  to  their  own  statement,  attempted  to  explore  to  the 
north,  but  were  prevented  by  stress  of  weather  and  injury  to  the 
ship's  tackle.  They  returned  laden  indeed  with  sassafras,  but 
with  no  tidings  of  the  lost  colony.  So  ended  Raleigh's  last  at- 
tempt to  recover  the  subjects  of  his  little  commonwealth. 

In  the  same  year  another  voyage  sailed  with  a  definite  scheme 
for  renewing  the  attempt  at  colonization,  though  on  a  small  and 
Gosnoid's  unambitious  scale.  Among  the  chief  promoters  of  this 
voyage. »  voyage  was  one  on  whom  some  portions  of  Raleigh's 
spirit  had  descended.  The  Earl  of  Southampton  shared  the 
versatility,  the  love  of  enterprise,  the  literary  tastes  and  the  per- 
sonal graces  of  his  great  predecessor,  though  he  could  lay  no 
claim  to  that  power  of  "  toiling  terribly  "  and  to  that  statesman- 
like wisdom  which  marked  out  Raleigh  as  a  born  ruler  of  men. 
The  precise  nature  of  Southampton's  share  in  the  undertaking  is 
unknown.  The  command  was  entrusted  to  Bartholomew  Gos- 
nold,  an  experienced  seaman,  destined  to  take  a  leading  part  in 
the  settlement  of  Virginia,  and  to  find  a  grave  in  the  wilderness 
which  he  had  helped  to  subdue.  In  March,  1602,  he  sailed  from 
Falmouth  with  thirty-two  adventurers,  of  whom  twenty-three 
were  to  stay  as  settlers  in  Virginia.  The  chief  feature  of  the 
voyage  was  the  discovery  of  a  new  route  by  the  Azores,  to  the 
south  of  that  usually  taken  before,  whereby  the  distance  was 
shortened  by  fifteen  hundred  miles.  The  land  finally  reached  by 
the  voyagers  was  considerably  to  the  north,  of  Raleigh's  two  col- 
onies, and  was  that  occupied  by  the  Puritan  settlers  thirty  years 
later.  The  natural  resources  of  the  country  appeared  scarcely 
inferior  to  those  of  Virginia.  The  woods  abounded  in  sassafras, 
the  natives  possessed  copper,  and  .there  was  reason  to  hope  that 
gold  mines  might  be  found.     English   corn   and  flax  ripened 

.  ]  A  full  account  of  Gosnoid's  voyage,  by  one  of  his  followers,  Gabriel  Archer,  is  published 
in  Purchas,  iv.  1647. 


I06  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

quickly.  The  savages  were  as  friendly  as  those  in  the  south. 
The  scheme  of  settlement  was  abandoned,  chiefly,  it  would  seem, 
for  lack  of  provisions.  Though  this  part  of  the  project  failed, 
yet  the  results  of  Gosnold's  voyage  can  hardly  be  overrated.  It 
shortened  the  voyage  to  America  by  at  least  a  week,  and  it  re- 
vealed the  fact  that  the  extent  of  sea-board  fit  for  settlement  was 
practTcally  boundless. 

The  next  year  saw  two  more  voyagers  sent  forth,  both  directly 
due  to  Gosnold's  discoveries.  The  more  important  of  them 
Richard  brings  us  face  to  face  with  one  who  has  been  our  chief 
Hakiuyt.  gujdg  jn  many  of  the  scenes  through  which  we  have 
passed.  It  is  indeed  hard  to  -estimate  at  its  full  value  the  debt 
which  succeeding  generations  owe  to  Richard  Hakiuyt.  Through 
his  labors  the  voyages  and  discoveries  of  the  fifteenth  century 
come  before  us  with  a  variety  and  fascination  equal  to  that  of  any 
romance,  and  with  a  dignity  worthy  of  any  epic.  But  for  him 
much  would  never  have  seen  the  light  of  day,  and  much  of  what 
did  must  now  have  been  laboriously  extracted  from  scattered 
volumes  in  divers  languages.  Such  an  episode  as  Hakluyt's  ride 
to  Norfolk  to  obtain  an  account  of  Hore's  voyage  from  one  of 
the  few  survivors,  is  a  good  instance  of  the  toilsome  process  by 
which  his  materials  were  gathered  together  in  those  days  when 
travel  and  correspondence  were  alike  beset  with  difficulties.  To 
us  Hakiuyt  is  pre-eminently  the  historian  of  discovery ;  to  his  own 
generation  he  was  its  wise  and  energetic  advocate  and  supporter. 
His  interest  in  the  subject  dated  from  the  day  when,  as  a  West- 
minster school-boy,  he  first  saw  a  map  which  revealed  to  him  in 
full  the  recent  discoveries,  and  when  the  Psalmist's  account  of  the 
wonders  seen  by  those  that  go  down  into  the  deep  first  rushed 
upon  his  mind  as  a  real  and  living  picture.  His  training  at  Ox- 
ford may  have  brought  him  under  the  spell  of  Gilbert's  romantic 
hopes.  His  later  appointment  as  a  canon  of  Bristol  threw  him 
into  the  very  heart  of  the  new-born  era  of  seamanship,  among 
the  traditions  of  its  dawn  and  the  glories  of  its  noon-day.  At 
the  time  of  which  we  are  now  speaking  he  had  already  a  well- 
established  reputation  as  the  foremost  English  authority  on  all 
that  concerned  the  New  World.  In  1589  he  had  published  his 
first  volume  of  voyages,  the  modest  precursor  of  that  noble  work 
which  appeared  ten  years  later,  and  by  which  the  author  is  best 
known  to  later  ages.     Nor  does  he  deserve  less  praise  for  his  ex* 


RICHARD  HAKLUYT.  IO>j 

hortations  to  the  English  Government  to  follow  the  example  of 
Spain,  and  to  endow  the  scientific  teaching  of  navigation.1 

He  now,  seemingly  for  the  first  time,  took  an  active  part  in 
fitting  out  a  voyage  of  discovery.  His  partners  in  the  adventure 
The  were  some  leading  merchants  of  Bristol,  among  them 

of  ^6o3C.S  one  John  Salterne,  who  had  accompanied  Gosnold  in 
the  preceding  year.  Salterne  does  not  appear  himself  to  *have 
taken  part  in  the  voyage,  nor  did  Hakluyt.  If  he  had  done  so 
the  history  of  discovery  would  probably  have  been  enriched  by 
one  of  its  most  precious  and  fascinating  descriptions.  The  com- 
mand of  the  voyage  was  entrusted  to  one  Martin  Pring,  whose 
seamanship  had  already  been  tested. in  the  East  Indies,  and  to 
whose  account  we  owe  our  knowledge  of  this  voyage.2  The  ad- 
venturers did  not  aim  at  settlement,  but  only  at  exploration  and 
trade.  Two  vessels,  the  Speedwell  of  fifty  tons,  and  the  Discov- 
ery of  twenty-six,  were  sent  out  laden  with  hats  of  divers  colors, 
clothes,  mirrors,  and  implements  of  husbandry  and  carpentry. 
We  are  faintly  reminded  of  the  musicians  who  accompanied  Gil- 
bert on  his  ill-starred  voyage  when  we  read  of  a  youth  that  could 
play  on  a  gittern,  "  in  whose  homely  music  the  savages  took  great 
delight,  and  would  give  him  many  things,  and  dance  twenty  in  a 
ring,  and  the  gittern  in  the  midst  of  them,  using  many  savage 
gestures."  Beside  the  music  Pring  had  other  less  pleasing  means 
for  influencing  the  natives.  Two  mastiffs  accompanied  the  party, 
of  whom  the  natives  were  more  afraid,  Pring  assures  us,  than  of 
twenty  Englishmen.  Before  the  voyage  sailed,  Hakluyt  obtained 
formal  permission  from  Sir  Walter  Raleigh,  whose  patent  rights 
were  yet  reckoned  valid.  With  this  slight  and  almost  formal 
recognition,  Raleigh's  connection  with  Virginia  ends.  A  new 
era  had  begun,  marked  by  a  memorable  event.  When  Pring 
embarked  the  great  queen  was  on  her  death-bed,  and  before  he 
had  left  the  shores  of  England  she  was  no  more.  The  union  of 
the  two  events,  the  end  of  Raleigh's  colonial  career,  and  the 
death  of  his  mistress,  has  a  real  meaning,  such  as  is  often  found 
in  the  seemingly  chance  coincidences  of  history.  Elizabeth, 
with  all  her  faults  and  weaknesses,  was  the  real  centre  round 
which  the  heroism  of  the  age  grouped  itself,  and  it  was  by  a  true 
and  happy  intuition  that  the  fanciful  gallantry  of  the  court  asso- 

(     '  Preface  to  Hakluyt's  Divers  Voyages.     Cf.  the  introduction  to  this  work  by  Mr.  Winter 
Jones,  p.  vii. 

'  This  account  is  published  in  Purchas,  iv.  1654. 


r<>8  the  virg::  :paxy. 

X  our  first  American  colony  with  the  name  of  the  Virgin 
Queen.     Early  in  October  Pring  returned,  after  a  prosperous  ex- 
rion.     His  report  of  the  country  told  his  employers  little  that 
V>ut  it  fully  confirmed  the  good  account  of  his  prede- 
cessors.    This  was  borne  out  by  another  voyage  in  the  same 
made  by  Gilbert,  who  had  acted  as  second  in  command  to 
old. 
No  seems  to  have  been  made  in  1604,  but  in  the  n 

year  the  Earl  of  Southampton  and  Lord  Thomas  Arundel  sent 
Wey.  one  out  under  the  command  of  Captain  George  YVey- 

mouth's      mouth.     It  would  be  wearisome  to  report  the  incidents 

voyage  r 

in  x6o5J  0f  exploration  and  intercourse  with  the  natives.  The 
most  noteworthy  event  was  the  hardly-achieved  capture  of  five 
savages.  The  report  of  the  country  even  surpassed  that  of  pre- 
vious voyagers.  Especial  stress  was  laid  on  the  size  of  the  Ken- 
nebec river  and  its  fitness  for  navigation.  Some  of  the  explorers 
who  had  accompanied  Raleigh  up  the  Oronoco  gave  the  prefer- 
ence to  the  recent  discovery,  and,  but  for  a  patriotic  reservation 
in  favor  of  the  Thames,  the  Kennebec  seemed  to  take  rank  above 
all  the  rivers  of  Europe. 

A  new  power  was  now  to  be  enlisted  in  the  service  of  coloni- 
zation. Hitherto  whatever  had  been  done  had  been  due  to  the 
Formation  energy  and  enterprise  of  private  men.  It  could  hardly, 
Virginia  however,  be  expected  that  any  should  be  found  to  fol- 
Company.  iow  m  the  footsteps  of  Gilbert  and  Raleigh.  The 
Muscovy  and  East  India  companies  offered  more  encouraging 
examples.  The  former  had,  as  we  have  already  seen,  achieved 
success  beyond,  the  scope  of  any  individual.  The  colonists  of 
Virginia  had  before  them  a  later  aryfl  more  conspicuous  prece- 
dent. In  1599  a  small  band  of  LonrJon  merchants  met  together 
to  discuss  a  corporate  scheme  of  trade,  with  the  East.  That 
meeting  laid  the  foundation  of  our  Indian  Empire.  Their  labors 
had  also  an  indirect  result,  trivial  in  comparison,  yet  not  without 
importance.  We  can  hardly  doubt  that  the  rapid  success  of  the 
East  India  Company  led  the  advocates  of  American  colonization 
to  adopt  it  as  their  model.  The  fate  of  each  body  was  singu- 
larly at  variance  with  its  early  promise.  The  East  India  Com- 
pany at  its  outset  did  not  aim  at  anything  beyond  trading 
ages  and  the  establishment  of  factories.  The  Virginia  Comr 
sought  to  found  a  colonial  empire.     The  former  took  rank  among 

1  Purchas,  rr.  1659. 


FIRST  VIRGINIA   CONSTITUTION.  ^9 

the  rulers  of  the  earth  and  numbered  princes  among  its  vassals. 
The  latter,  even  in  its  brief  day  of  prosperity,  was  little  more 
than  a  trading  association. 

In  April,  1606,  two  companies,  or  rather  perhaps  one  company 
with  two  subdivisions,  was  formed  to  undertake  the  colonization 
of  America.1  One,  consisting  of  London  merchants^  was  to  es- 
tablish a  plantation  between  forty-rwe  and  thirty-eight  degrees 
north  latitude;  the  other,  whose  members  were  chiefly  v. 
country  gentlemen  and  traders,  between  forty-on€  and  thirty-four 
degrees.  A  clause  was  added  forbidding  the  settlements  to  be 
formed  within  a  hundred  miles  of  one  another.  Despite  this  pre- 
caution, the  arrangement,  through  the  absence  of  a  fixed  bound- 
ary between  them,  might  have  proved  inconvenient  but  for  the 
total  failure  of  the  northern,  or,  as  it  was  called,  the  Plymouth 
colony.  That  part  or  the  undertaking  will  come  before  us  here- 
after ;  for  the  present  it  will  be  enough  to  consider  the  fortunes 
of  the  London  Company.  Its  principal  members  were  Hakluyt, 
Sir  George  Somers,  and  Sir  Thomas  Gates.  The  two  latter  names 
must  have  suggested  that  the  undertaking  was  no  mere  mercan^_ 
tile  speculation,  but  one  which  would  need  the  daring  of  the 
military  adventurer.  Somers  was  a  trained  soldier,  "  a  lamb  on 
shore,  a  lion  at  sea,"  as  Fuller  tells  us,  and  had  shared  with  Amyas 
Preston  the  command  in  one  of  the  most  heroic  exploits  of  Eng- 
lishmen on  the  Spanish  Main,  the  capture  of  St.  Jago  de  Leon.2 
Of  Gates  we  know  less,  but  he  had  won  the  honor  of  knighthood 
in  days  when  it  was  the  reward  of  personal  courage  and  capacity. 

A  patent  was  granted  by  the  king  dated  the  10th  of  April, 
1606,  which  defined  the  boundaries  of  the  plantation  and  made 
Constitu-  provision  for  the  government.  A  Council  of  thirteen, 
company.s  nominated  by  the  Crown  and  resident  in  the  colony, 
was  to  govern  in  accordance  with  laws,  ordinances  and  instruc- 
tions to  be  given  by  the  king.  This  body  was  to  be  under  the 
control  of  a  superior  Council,  established  in  England  and  nomi- 
nated by  the  king.  The  resident  Council  was  to  have  the  right 
of  coining  money  and  the  full  control  over  all  precious  metals, 
paying  a  royalty  of  one-fifth  to  the  Crown.  The  rights  conferred 
on  the  patentees  were  :  the  free  transport  of  emigrants  and  goods 

1  The  patent  of  the  two  companies  in  Stith,  Appendix. 

2  An  account  of  this  expedition,  written  by  one  Robert  Davy,  who  himself  took  part  in  it. 
is  published  in  Hakluyt,  iv.  61. 

*  The  patent,  the  names  of  the  Council,  and  the  orders  are  all  given  by  Stith,  Appendix  L* 
and  p.  30. 


VI 


:he  right  to  exact,  if  necessary  by  force,  a  duty  from  all  per- 
•  rading  with  the  colony,  two  and  a  half  per  cent,  from  Eng- 
iibjects,  and  five  per  cent,  from  foreigners.     The  proceeds 

to  accrue  for  twenty-one  years  to  the  Company,  after  that 
e' Crown.  In  November  the  king  nominated  a  Council  of 
ekn.  Among  its  members  was  Sir  Thomas  Smith,  a  leading 
ber  of  the  East  India  Company  and  foremost  in  all  the  com- 
ial  adventures  of  the  age;  Sir  John  Popham,  Chief  Justice 
Queen's  Bench,  and  a  patentee  for  the  Plymouth,  as  Smith 
for  the  London,  plantation;  Sir  Walter  Cope;  Sir  Henry 
t4gue,  the  Recorder  of  London ;  Dodderidge,  the  Attorney - 
rall ;  and  three  merchants  from  Bristol,  Plymouth,  and  Lon- 

iHere,  too,  we  meet  for  the  first  time  a  name  that  for  many 
i  figures  prominently  in  the  history  of  America,  Sir  Fernando 
;es.     The  number  of  this  Council  was  soon  found  insufficient, 
eleven  more  names  were  added,  including  that  of  Sir  Edwin  i 
ft,  in  later  days  the  ruling  spirit  of  the  Virginia  Company,  f 
|e  same  time  a  paper  of  instructions  was  drawn  up  and  is- 

under  the  Privy  Seal,  fixing  the  constitution,  if,  indeed,  it 

\es  that  name,  of  the  intended  Company.1  The  resident 
icil  was  to  be  nominated  by  that  in  England,  and  was  to 
rat  from  among  its  own  members  a  president,  not  in  holy 
rsj"  The  first  articles  of  government  provided  for  the  main- 
ice  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  the  king's  suprem- 
I  The  tenure  of  land  was  to  be  the  same  as  that  of  the 
m  country.  The  outlines  of  a  penal  code  were  laid  down 
e  orders.     "  Tumults,  rebellions,  conspiring,  mutiny,  and  se- 

J  together  with  murder,  manslaughter,  incest,  rape,  and 
:» jy,"  were  to  be  tried  by  jury,  and  the  offenders,  if  guilty, 
5  ilunished  with  death.     Minor  offenders,  among  whom  were 

."  and  "  all  loiter 
jgt,     were  to  be  tried  by  the  Council,  an- 


'  >  P«  4< 


ITS  CHARACTER. 


ii 


vided  always  that  they  (the  ordinances)  be  such  as  might  stand 
with  and  be  consonant  to  the  laws  of  England  and  the  equity 
thereof";  a  restraint  not  likely  to  be  very  effectual  with  a  Stuart 
king  or  his  counselors.  The  orders  also  provided  that  all  trade 
was  to  be  public  and  under  the  control  of  an  officer  appointed 
by  the  Council  from  among  themselves,  and  called  the  Treasurer 
or  Cape  Merchant.  Magazines  were  to  be  provided  into  which 
all  the  produce  of  the  colony  was  to  be  brought  and  from  which 
all  necessaries  were  to  be  supplied  to  the  settlers.  One  praise- 
worthy feature  of  the  constitution  deserves  notice.  It  enjoined 
the  colonists  "  to  show  kindness  to  the  savages  and  heathen  peo- 
ple in  those  parts,  and  use  ail  proper  means  to  draw  them  to  the 
true  knowledge  and  service  of  God." 

The  constitution  embodied  in  the  patent  and  orders  carried  its 
character  on  its  face.     It  differs  entirely  from  any  of  those  patents 
character    which  have  been  already  noticed.     Those  granted  to 
stitution.n~  Gilbert  and  Raleigh  did  nothing  towards  determining 
the  nature  or  constitution  of  the  intended  settlements.     After  the 
most  vague  and  general  description  of  the  supreme  right  of  the 
Crown,  all  further  arrangements  were  left  to  the  patentees.    The 
Virginia  patent,  on  the  other  hand,  claimed  in  the  most  absolute 
manner  every  detail  of  government  as  the  province  of  the  Crown. 
This  was  in  part  due  to  altered  circumstances,  irTpart  to  the  di£"~"" 
ferent  character  of  the  two  sovereigns.     Yet  we  can  hardly  sup- 
pose that  if  the  future  of  Virginia  had  been  foreseen^  or  if  t) 
rapid  prosperity  of  the  colony  had  been  looked  fer/such  a  coni^Jjj^} 
stitution  would  have  gone  unchallenged.     Even  if  the  patentees^  &*r-?1 
were  too  eager  to  secure  a  groundwork  for  their  'commercial    fcs^i 
venture  to  question  the  terms  of  the  bargain,  yet  we  can  hardl%/tJ*^ 
think  that  the  statesmen  who  had  not  bowed  the  knee  before  the  ~~^&    ta; 
slavish  principles  of  absolutism,  would  have  suffered  the  king  to 
gain  such  a  vantage  ground  as  his  unrestrained  control  over  the 
colony  might  have  given  him.      Had  the  first  constitution  're- 
mained in  force,  Virginia  might  at  a  later  day  have  become  a 
most  dangerous  weapon  in  the  hands  of  a  despot.     Her  govern- 
ment might  have  been  filled  with  placemen,  her  resources  drained 
by  arbitrary  taxation,  and  the  patronage  and  wealth  thus  acquired 
might  have  been  used  by  the  king  with  fearful  effect  against  the 
liberties  of  his  English  subjects.     Not  that  it  would  be  reason- 
able to  suspect  James  of  any  such  far-sighted  designs.     Had  he 
entertained  them  he  never  would  have  suffered  his  control  over 


II2  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 

Virginia  to  slip  from  his  grasp  with  scarcely  an  effort  to  retain  it. 
Had  the  whole  influence  and  the  whole  revenue  of  Virginia  ever 
been  at  his  disposal,  he  would,  in  all  likelihood,  have  heedlessly 
granted  them  away  to  some  Scotch  adventurer.  The  difference 
between  James  and  his  great  predecessor  is  well  illustrated  by 
the  manner  in  which  each  dealt  with  the  newly-settled  colonies. 
Elizabeth  had  a  full  share  of  the  despotic  temper  of  her  race. 
But  when  she  tyrannized,  it  was  with  a  tyranny  which  never 
stooped  to  petty  interference  and  meddlesome  dictation.  If  the 
Nonconformists  of  her  reign  had  sought  to  establish  a  settlement 
in  the  New  World,  they  would  probably  have  fared  far  worse 
with  her  than  their  successors  did  with  James.  But  the  narrow 
and  sordid  illiberality  which  would  trust  men  with  the  task  of 
founding  a  colony,  but  would  grant  them  no  share  in  its  manage- 
ment, found  no  place  in  the  policy  of  the  great  queen.  And  no- 
where is  the  character  of  James's  government,  so  strong  in  asser- 
tion, so  weak  in  act,  shown  more  clearly  than  in  the  history  of 
Virginia.  The  absolute  power  claimed  at  the  outset  is  filched 
away  piecemeal  without  a  shadow  of  resistance.  The  first  con- 
stitution of  Virginia  made  it  a  stronghold  of  despotism :  in  less 
than  twenty  years  it  was,  in  almost  everything  save  name,  an  in- 
dependent state. 

On  the  ioth  of  December  two  ships  and  a  pinnace,  with  one 
hundred  and  forty-three  emigrants,  were  ready  for  the  voyage.1 
Prepara-  Orders  were  issued  by  the  company  giving  the  corn- 
voyage.2  mand  over  the  fleet  to  Christopher  Newport,  an  expe- 
rienced seaman,  who,  fourteen  years  before,  had  distinguished 
himself  in  a  raid  on  the  Spanish  main.3  With  him  were  asso- 
ciated Gosnold  and  a  so-called  John  Ratcliffe,  of  whom  we  know 
nothing  but  that  his  enemies  accused  him  of  concealing  his  true 
name  of  Sickelmore,4  and  that  his  days  in  Virginia  were  few  and 

1  Neill,  p.  17.  Neither  Percy  nor  Newport  mentions  the  exact  number,  and  Smith's  enu- 
meration seems  exact.  He  names  eighty-two,  and  states  that  there  were  others,  making  the 
number  up  to  a  hundred. 

2  Our  authorities  for  this  expedition  are :  1.  Mr.  Neill's  Virginia  Company.  2.  An  ac- 
count written  by  George  Percy,  a  leading  colonist,  and  published  in  Purchas,  iv.  1685.  3. 
Three  MS.  reports  by  Newport  preserved  among  the  State  Papers.  These  have  been  epito- 
mized by  Mr.  Sainsbury,  Colonial  Papers,  1607,  May  21,  and  have  been  republished  in  the 
Arclueologia  Americana,  vol.  iv.  For  the  later  portion  of  the  proceedings  our  best  authori- 
ties are  Smith,  Wingfield,  and  Percy. 

8  Hakluyt,  iv.  48. 

4  Smith,  p.  72.  In  his  letter  to  the  Council,  "  Captain  Ratcliffe  is  now  called  Sickelmore, 
a  poor  counterfeited  imposture."  Again,  p.  105:  "John  Sickelmore,  alias  Ratcliffe."  Else- 
where Smith  (or  the  writers  from  whom  Smith's  history  is  compiled)  call  him  simply  Captair 
Sickelmore.     One  of  them  calls  him  "  a  very  valiant,  honest,  and  painful  soldier  " 


PREPARATIONS  FOR  THE   VOYAGE.  n3 

evil.  These  commanders  were  furnished  with  a  sealed  paper 
containing  the  names  of  the  Council  in  Virginia,  not  to  be  opened 
till  they  reached  their  new  home.  At  the  same  time  they  were 
furnished  with  orders  for  the  conduct  of  the  expedition  after  land- 
ing.1 On  their  arrival  the  Council  was  to  elect  a  president  who 
should  have  "  full  power  and  authority,  with  the  advice  of  the 
rest  of  the  Council,  or  the  greatest  part  of  them,  to  govern,  rule, 
and  command  all  the  captains  and  soldiers,  and  all  other  his 
Majesty's  subjects  of  his  colony,  according  to  the  true  meaning 
of  the  orders  and  directions  set  down  in  the  articles  signed  by 
his  Majesty."  Newport  was  instructed  to  spend  two  months  in 
exploring  the  country  and  freighting  the  ships,  and  then  to  re- 
turn to  England.  With  these  orders  was  a  paper  of  suggestions, 
possibly  drawn  up  by  Hakluyt.2  The  settlers  were  directed  to 
find  a  safe  spot  at  the  mouth  of  a  navigable  river.  If  the  river 
should  branch,  they  were  to  take  the  branch  farthest  to  the  north- 
west as  most  likely  to  lead  to  a  passage  to  the  South  Sea.  They 
were  to  go  as  far  up  as  would  allow  a  bark  of  fifty  tons  to  float, 
and  so  to  be  as  inaccessible  as  possible  to  enemies  coming  from 
the  sea,  without  cutting  themselves  off  from  supplies.  For  the 
same  object  a  small  outpost  was  to  be  stationed  at  the  mouth  of 
the  river  to  warn  the  settlers  if  a  strange  fleet  should  come  in 
sight.  So,  too,  the  spot  selected  was  not  to  be  too  thickly  wooded, 
both  for  the  labor  of  clearing,  and  the  covert  afforded  to  enemies. 
Strict  attention  was  to  be  paid  to  the  wholesomeness  of  the  site. 
"  Neither  must  you  plant  in  a  low  or  moist  place,  because  it  will 
prove  unhealthful.  *  You  shall  judge  of  the  good  air  by  the  peo- 
ple; for  some  part  of  that  coast  where  the  lands  are  low,  have 
their  people  blear-eyed,  and  with  swollen  bellies  and  legs,  but  if 
the  naturals  be  strong  and  clean-made,  it  is  a  true  sign  of  a 
wholesome  soil."  Of  the  colonists,  two-thirds  were  to  be  em- 
ployed at  once  upon  the  settlement,  half  to  fortify  and  build,  and 
the  rest  to  till  the  ground.  The  remaining  forty  were  to  accom- 
pany Newport  in  his  expedition.  The  principal  objects  to  which 
he  was  to  attend  in  his  journeyings  were  the  discovery  of  precious 
metals,  and  of  a  passage  to  the  South  Seas.  About  the  treat- 
ment of  the  natives,  the  instructions  are  very  full  and  minute. 
In  no  case  was  a  settlement  to  be  made  in  any  spot  where  the 
Savages  could  cut  off  the  communications  with  the  sea.  To  save 
their  own  seed  corn,  the  English  were  to  trade  as  much  as  possi-j 


1  These  orders  are  published  by  Mr.  Neill.     Virginia  Co.,  p.  4.  *  lb.,  p.  8. 

8 


II4  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 

ble  with  the  natives  for  food,  not  betraying  their  purpose  of 
tling  lest  they  should  be  refused  supplies.     The  writer  o: 
instructions  was  evidendy  familiar  with  the  adventures  o: 
Spaniards,  and  knew  the  full  value  of  firearms,  and  the  supersti-j 
tious  awe  with  which  the  natives  regarded  them,    The  settleJ 
were  enjoined  never  to  suffer  the  natives  to  carry  their  musketsJ 
None  but  picked  marksmen  were  to  practice  in  the  sight  o: 
Indians,  lest  the  terror  which  surrounded  their  weapons  shou. 
dispelled.     So,  too,  the  settlers  were  not  to  shake  the  faith  ofl 
the  Indians  in  the  superior  race  as  invulnerable  and  imm: 
"Above  all  things  do  not  advertise  the  killing  of  any  of 
men,  that  the  country  people  may  know  it :  if  they  perceive 
they  are  but  common  men,  and  that  with  loss  of  many  of  tfc 
they  may  diminish  any  part  of  yours,  they  will  make  many  adfl 
ventures  upon  you.     If  the  country  be  populous,  you  shall 
do  well  not  to  let  them  see  or  know  of  your  sick  men  (if 
have  any),  which  may  also  encourage  them  to  any  enterpr 
Newport  is  instructed  to  bring  home  "  a  perfect  relation  of  all  J 
that  is  done."     No  one  is  to  leave  the  colony  without  a  passport  1 
from  the  President  and  Council,  or  to  send  home  any  letter  that 
may  discourage  others.     The  instructions  end  with  an  exhorta- 
tion which  bore  little  fruit     "  Lasdy  and  chiefly,  the  way  to  pros- 
per and  achieve  good  success  is  to  make  yourselves  all  of  one 
mind,  for  the  good  of  your  country  and  your  own,  and  to 
and  fear  God,  the  Giver  of  all  goodness :    for  every  plantatic 
which  your  heavenly  Father  hath  not  planted  shall  be  root* 
out." 

On  the  New  Year's  Day  of  1607,  the  litde  fleet  sailed  froi 
the  Downs.  Drayton  was  the  laureate  of  the  expedition,  an< 
^J^yj^^  the  spirited  lines  in  which  he  bade  the  voyagers 

Cheerfully  at  sea 

Success  you  still  entice 
To  get  the  pearl  and  gold, 
And  ours  to  hold 

Virginia,  earth's  only  Paradise,1 

showed  that  the  rock  on  which  Frobisher  and  Lane  had  made 
shipwreck  was  still  not  without  its  dangers.     The  voyage  was  a 
tedious  one.     At  the  outset  contrary  winds  delayed  the  fleet  so  I 
long  that  it  stayed  for  six  weeks  within  sight  of  England.2     Then, 

1  Drayton's  works,  «L  1748,  pt  421. 

»  South,  p.  41.     Percy  in  Purchas,  ir.  1685. 


CAPTAIN  JOHX  SMITH. 


instead  of  going  to  Virginia  by  the  direct  course  which  Gosnj 
had  taken,  the  emigrants  stopped  in  the  West  Indies  to  coll 
seeds  and  roots.1  A  long  sea  voyage  is  no  unfruitful  parent] 
strife,  and  the  party  already  had  within  it  elements  of  discd 
Among  the  emigrants  was  one  who  played  so  important  a  d 
in  Virginian  history  that  he  deserves  more  than  a  passing  notl 
Captain  John  Smith,  like  more  than  one  of  the  characters  vj 
whom  we  shall  meet,  carried  the  versatile  capacity  and  activity 
the  sixteenth  century  into  a  less  congenial  age.  Even  during] 
lifetime  his  doings  passed  from  the  domain  of  the  historian  1 
that  of  the  romance  writer.  If  contemporary  accounts  be  tJ 
his  adventures  in  America,  dramatic  as  they  seem  to  us,  were  I 
the  prosaic  sequel  to  a  far  more  marvelous  career  in  the  d 
World.  His  tale,  as  told  by  himself  and  his  admirers,  is  famil 
to  even-  student  of  colonial  history.8  The  son  of  a  Lincolnsl 
gentleman,  he  had  learned  the  art  of  war  on  the  battle-ground 
Europe,  the  Low  Countries.  Thence  his  resdess  temper  drj 
him  to  embark  at  Marseilles  in  quest  of  adventures  in  the  Em 
Thrown  into  the  sea  by  French  pilgrims  as  a  Huguenot  Jon 
he  had  been  saved  by  a  pirate,  and  retrieved  his  fortunes  tJ 
successful  voyage  in  the  Mediterranean.  In  Hungary  he  I 
fought  in  single  combat  with  a  Turkish  champion,  and  had  txj 
off  his  enemy's  head  in  the  sight  of  the  whole  Christian  arl 
He  had  been  left  for  dead  on  the  field  of  Rothenthurm,  and  a 
into  slavery.  Rescued  by  a  Turkish  beauty,  he  was  again  enslal 
by  a  jealous  pasha,  and  after  beating  out  his  rival's  brain  wil 
club,  had  fled  in  disguise  through  the  wilds  of  Circassia. 
travels  had  led  him  through  every  civilized  country  in  Europe,  I 
to  the  court  of  Morocco.  It  is  not  strange  that  such  a  si 
should  have  excited  the  incredulity  of  his  contemporaries.  1 
even  if  we  mistrust  some  of  the  more  romantic  episodes,  it  wJ 
be  unfair  to  set  down  the  hero  as  a  mere  braggart,  a  MunchaJ 
or  a  miles  gloriosus.  That  he  had  his  full  share  of  boastfulj 
and  vanity  is  likely  enough,  and  there  is  reason  to  think  than 
hack  writers  of  his  own  age  availed  themselves  of  his  weaki 
and  traded  on  his  reputation.  But  whatever  may  be  the  trutl 
to  details,  there  is  confirmatory  evidence  of  his  military  care  J 
Eastern  Europe,  while  his  doings  in  America,  for  which  therl 
ample  authority,  and  that  not  always  friendly,  show  him  to  hi 


I  i  5  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

been  brave,  able,  and  public-spirited.  No  doubt  he  was  in  mod- 
<ai  language  an  adventurer,  but  he  has  nothing  in  common  with 
Hedy,  unscrupulous  self-seekers,  like  Stukeley,  nor  does  his  char- 
ier, as  handed  down  to  us,  show  any  trace  of  the  knavish, 
^ftfligate,  swaggering  soldier  of  fortune  who  is  a  stock  character 

>f  the  Elizabethan  stage.  He  seems  to  have  been  a  thoroughly 
representative  Englishman,  active,  self-reliant,  untiring,  humane 
though  unsympathetic,  faithful  to  his  employers,  but  somewhat 
inclined  to  overrate  his  own  services  and  to  regard  himself  as  an 
injured  man,  though  without  desiring  any  revenge  beyond  the 
liberty  of  grumbling.  It  was  hardly  wonderful  that  such  a  man 
.should  come  into  conflict  with  those  set  over  him,  and  before  the 
r!eet  reached  Virginia  Smith  found  himself  under  arrest.  What 
w  .as  his  precise  offense  it  is  impossible  to  say,  but  we  may  at  least 
assume  that  if,  as  some  writers  tell  us,  he  had  been  guilty  of  mu- 
tiny, in  any  sense  at  least  beyond  a  technical  one,  he  never  could 
have  held  the  positions  of  trust  in  which  we  afterwards  find  him, 

le  the  cause  what  it  might,  Smith  was  cast  into  irons,  and  it  was 
an  evil  omen  for  the  young  colony,  that  when  the  emigrants 
landed,  the  ablest  man  among  them  was  a  prisoner. 

After  leaving  the  West  Indies  the  fleet  took  a  northwest  course. 
Newport  seems  to  have  erred  in  his  reckoning,  and  land  was  not 
Landing  '  reached  till  three  days  after  the  due  time.  If  the  story 
settlers.'  be  true  that  the  settlers  thereupon  lost  heart,  and  would 
fain  have  returned  to  England,  it  says  but  little  for  the  spirit  in 
which  they  entered  on  their  task.2  Such  an  idea,  however,  if 
entertained,  was  set  at  rest  by  the  discovery  of  land.  On  the 
1 6th  of  April  the  voyagers  sighted  a  point,  which,  in  honor  of  the 
P^nce  of  Wales,  they  named  Cape  Henry,  and  which  proved  to 

ft  the  southernmost  extremity  of  Chesapeake  Bay.  A  party 
l&aded,  and  in  a  skirmish  with  the  natives  which  followed,  two 
Wire  wounded.  A  fortnight  more  was  spent  in  exploring  the 
b%,  and  seeking  for  a  place  of  settlement.  On  the  13th  of  May 
th^y  fixed  on  a  spot,  choosing  for  security  a  peninsula,  and  na^ned  j 
rh^ir  new  settlement  Jamestown.  The  orders  and  the  list  c^f  the  J 
Gbuncil  were  now  opened.     Smith  was  among  those  nominated  J 

m  the  Council,  but  for  the  present  he  was  not  allowed  to  take  : 
hi&  seat.3     That  he  was  neither  kept  under  arrest,  nor  debarred 

1  Smith,  p.  42.     Purchas,  iv.  1686. 
H -  'Smith  attributes  this  purpose  to  Ratcliffe. 


PROCEEDINGS  ON  LANDING. 


117 


from  active  service,  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  he  accompanied 
Newport  immediately  afterwards  on  an  exploring  expedition.1 
The  council  then  proceeded  to  elect  a  President.  This  choice 
fell  on  Edward  Maria  Wingfield.2  Our  information  about  him 
is  for  the  most  part  derived  from  unfriendly  sources,  and  it  may 
be  that  his  failure  as  President  was  as  much  due  to  the  character 
of  those  under  his  rule  as  to  his  own  failings.  That  he  was  a 
brave  soldier  and  a  just  and  honest  governor  appears  certain, 
but  he  seems  to  have  lacked  any  other  qualifications  for  his  post. 
His  own  writings  present  him  to  us  as  a  pompous,  formal  man, 
with  a  strong  sense  of  his  own  dignity,  and  with  very  little  capacity 
for  complying  with  the  rough  exigencies  of  colonial  life.3 

A  week  later  Newport  set  forth  with  a  party  of  twenty-three 
men  to  explore  the  river.  He  followed  the  stream  upwards  for 
Newport's"  tfyree  days,  halting  at  various  Indian  villages,  at  all  of 
tion.4  which  the  English  were  hospitably  received.     Newport 

seems  to  have  been  exceptionally  mild  and  conciliatory  in  all  his 
dealings  with  the  natives.  One  occasion,  when  informed  by  the 
guide  of  some  slight  act  of  discourtesy  on  the  part  of  one  of  the 
Indians,  Newport,  misunderstanding  the  nature  of  the  dispute, 
punished  one  of  his  own  men,  whereupon  the  Indian  chief,  not  to 
be  outdone,  stayed  the  punishment  and  chastised  the  real  culprit. 
Newport  also  seems  on  this  occasion  to  have  shown  the  same 
lavish  temper  in  his  presents  to  the  Indians  which  at  a  later 
period  offended  Smith.  The  skirmish  with  the  savages  near  Cape 
Henry  now  proved  of  service  to  the  English,  who,  finding  that 
their  enemies  were  also  hostile  to  the  natives  of  James  River, 
told  their  new  friends  of  the  affair,  and  showed  their  recent 
wounds  in  confirmation  of  the  tale.  The  principal  chief  in  this 
neighborhood  was  a  namesake,  probably  a  son,  of  Powhatan,  the 
great  king  of  that  country.  His  friendly  feeling  towards  the 
English,  and  his  authority  over  the  natives,  were  shown  not  only 
in  the  above-mentioned  instance,  but  by  the  summary  manner  in 
whiph  he  insisted  on  the  restitution  of  some  ammunition  which 

1  Arch.  Am.,  iv.  40.. 

2  The  best  authority  for  Wingfield's  proceedings  is  his  own  paper  called  A  Discourse  of 
Virginia,  relating  the  events  of  his  presidency,  and  justifying  himself  against  the  charges 
of  Smith  and  others.  This  paper  is  preserved  among  the  Lambeth  MSS.  and  has  been  pub- 
lished in  the  A  rch.  A  m. ,  vol.  iv. 

3  His  own  words  (p.  102)  are,  "  I  have  learnt  to  despise  the  verdict  of  the  vulgar,"  a  dan- 
gerous doctrine  for  the  leader  of  a  rough  gang  of  colonists. 

4  This  account  and  that  of  the  following  hostilities  with  the  Indians  is  taken  from  New- 


THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

been  stolen  by  his  subjects.  On  the  third  day  of  their  journey 
explorers  reached  the  falls,  where  Richmond  city  now  stands. 
I^Bport  would  fain  have  explored  the  river  farther,  but  was 
^Hred  by  Powhatan's  account  of  the  difficulties,  and,  after  fixing 
aJKss  with  the  royal  arms  on  one  of  the  islets,  the  party  returned 
tjgkmestown. 

gJThose  who  stayed  behind  had  been  less  fortunate  in  their  deal- 
iftja  with  the  natives.  Newport's  party  had  their  suspicions  ex- 
^H>ies  cited  by  the  conduct  of  their  gu.de,  who,  shortly  before 
H^Bns.  reaching  Jamestown^  refused^o  accompany  them  farther, 
cipating  some  evil,  Newport  pushed  on,  and  found  on  his 
arrival  that  the  settlement  had  been  attacked  by  a  band  of  two 
^^■red  savages.  The  assailants  were  beaten  off,  but  one  Eng- 
ban  was  killed  and  eleven  wounded,  among  them  four  Coun- 
ciiois.  Wingfield  especially  distinguished  himself  by  his  courage, 
and"  though  unhurt,  had  a  narrow  escape,  as  an  arrow  passed 
tbtoligh  his  beard.  During  the  next  fortnight  the  savages  con- 
tinued to  harrass  the  English  with  petty  attacks,  and  one  settler, 

ifctace  Clovell,  who  was  rash  enough  to  wander  beyond  the 
MU  was  mortally  wounded.  On  the  14th  of  June,  two  of  the 
natives  with  whom  Newport  had  made  friends  during  his  voy- 
age lip  the  river  came  to  the  fort :  they  explained  to  the  Eng- 
lish that  all  the  attacks  proceeded  from  certain  hostile  tribes, 
and;that  they  themselves,  and  the  other  Indians  along  the  river, 
would  either  join  the  settlers  in  an  alliance,  or  endeavor  to  make 
peace  between  them  and  their  enemies.  Before  departing  they 
advised  the  English  to  cut  down  the  long  grass  and  weeds  about 
the  fort.      That  such  advice  should  have  been  needed  speaks 

omfcwhat  ill  for  the  military  skill  with  which  the  defense  was 

onducted.  Seemingly  the  intercession  of  these  new  allies  was 
mecpsful,  for  we  hear  of  no  more  attacks  upon  the  fort. 

On  the  22d  of  June  Newport  sailed  for  England  with  a  cargo 
of  dap-board,  the  first  fruits  of  the  new  colony.  Before  his  de- 
parture he  asked  Wingfield  whether  he  thought  himself  settled  in 
the^'tovernment.  Wingfield  answered  that  the  only  men  from 
wMMn  danger  could  come  were  Gosnold  and  Archer,  both  Coun- 
<TOp,  of  whom  the  former  had  the  power,  the  latter  the  will,  to 
Ajlltrouble.1  The  evil  which  had  appeared  the  most  threaten- 
|?iiow  seemed  set  at  rest.     Owing,  as  it  would  seem,  to  the 

Vh.  Am.,  p.  77.     All  that  follows  is  taken  from  Wingfield,  Percy,  and  Smith's  True 

in.  ' 


SMITH  AMONG  THE  INDIANS.  LIg 

friendly  interposition  and  authority  of  Powhatan,  the  Indians  ab- 
stained from  all  hostility.  But  no  sooner  was  one  trouble  abated 
than  another  sprang  up.  Sickness  attacked  the  young  settlement, 
and  before  long  no  less  than  forty  had  died,  and  there  were  but 
six  healthy  men  in  the  fort.  Among  those  who  died  was  Gos- 
nold,  the  only  one  of  the  Council  who  could  work  harmoniously 
with  Wingfield.  The  discord  which  Newport  feared  soon  showed 
itself.  As  might  have  been  expected  in  a  time  of  want,  the  di- 
vision of  supplies  gave  rise  to  disputes.  Wingfield  was  accused, 
probably  without  justice,  of  taking  more  than  a  due  share  for  his 
own  use.  His  chief  accusers  were  Archer,  Smith  and  Ratcliffe. 
He  met  their  charges  with  recriminations  and  accused  them  of 
partiality  in  the  distribution  of  food.  It  is  impossible  to  say  how 
the  case  really  stood,  but  it  is  at  least  clear  that  Wingfield  did 
not  seek  to  conciliate  his  opponents,  and  that  he  showed  a  spirit 
of  bitter  hostility  to  Smith,  who,  even  by  his  enemy's  admission, 
was  laboring  zealously  and  successfully  to  obtain  supplies  from 
the  Indians.  It  ended  in  the  council  deposing  Wingfield  and 
substituting  Ratcliffe  in  his  place.  Soon  after  this  Wingfield  was 
found  guilty  of  slandering  Smith  and  another  colonist  named 
Robinson,  both  of  whom  received  damages  from  him,  Smith  one 
hundred  pounds,  Robinson  two  hundred.  Worse  troubles  fol- 
lowed. The  new  President  for  some  reason  chastised  one  Reed, 
a  smith.  Reed  struck  the  President  back,  and  for  this  was  sen- 
tenced to  death.  He  thereupon  brought  a  charge  of  mutiny 
against  one  Kendal.  Reed  was  released,  and  Kendal  was  tried, 
condemned,  and  hanged. 

During  this  time  of  trouble  Smith  had  made  several  short  ex- 
cursions among  the  Indian  tribes  in  the  immediate  neighborhood, 
Smith  but  the  state  of  the  settlement  had  forbidden  any  dis- 
indiaSsS e  tant  expedition.  The  election  of  the  new  President 
and  the  suppression  of  Kendal's  intended  mutiny,  gave  a  more 
settled  aspect  to  affairs.  Autumn,  too,  brought  with  it  an  abun- 
dant supply  of  wild  fowl,  and  removed  the  fear  of  famine.  Ac- 
cordingly, it  was  decided  to  make  a  more  thorough  survey  of  the 
country,  and  to  explore  the  Chickahominy  River.  A  leader  of 
the  expedition  was  chosen  by  lot,  and  the  task  fell  to  the  share 
of  Smith.  The  country  through  which  his  route  lay  was  under 
the  immediate  command  of  Powhatan's  brother,  Opechancanough. 

1  The  following  account  is  taken  from  Smith's  True  Relation.  The  discrepancy  between 
this  and  the  account  in  his  History  is  one  of  the  points  discussed  in  the  Appendix. 


,2o  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 

He,  unlike  Powhatan,  seems  from  the  outset  to  have  had  an  un- 
friendly feeling  to  the  new-comers.  Smith  probably  knew  this, 
and  was  on  his  guard  against  an  attack.  After  reaching  a  point 
beyond  which  his  vessel  could  not  go,  he  left  his  crew,  and  pro- 
ceeded in  a  canoe  with  two  Indian  guides  and  two  Englishmen. 
Smith's  departure  seems  to  have  been  the  signal  for  an  attack. 
The  Indians  fell  upon  the  main  body ;  one  man  was  slain  and 
the  rest  narrowly  escaped.  Smith  was  then  attacked,  and  his 
two  English  followers  killed.  He  himself  tied  his  Indian  guide 
before  him  as  a  buckler,  and  for  a  while  by  the  help  of  his  gun 
was  able  to  defy  the  archery  of  the  Indians.  But  in  attempting 
to  reach  his  canoe  he  fell  into  a  swamp.  Even  then  the  Indians 
dared  not  approach  him  till  at  length,  numbed  with  cold,  he  sur- 
rendered. The  tale  of  his  captivity,  as  first  told  by  Smith  him- 
self, has  few  of  those  romantic  features  which  gathered  round  it 
at  a  later  period.  Yet  even  when  we  discard  all  the  more  dra- 
matic coloring  of  the  later  tale,  it  is  clear  that  the  presence  of 
mind  and  ready  resource  of  Smith,  and  his  display  of  the  superior 
attainments  of  the  civilized  man,  made  a  deep  impression  on  the 
savages,  and  laid  the  foundation  of  a  most  valuable  ascendency 
over  them.  The  use  of  the  compass  and  the  gun,  and  Smith's 
power  of  corresponding  with  his  friends  at  Jamestown  by  writing, 
all  greatly  surprised  his  captors.  For  some  days  he  was  led 
about  as  a  sort  of  state  prisoner,  showing  off  his  accomplishments 
at  the  various  villages,  and  was  at  length  brought  before  Pow- 
hatan. The  savage  listened  with,  interest  to  all  that  Smith  told 
him  of  the  civilized  world,  and  in  return  gave  him  a  full  account 
of  Virginia,  its  various  tribes  and  their  dealings  with  one  another. 
Finally  Smith  was  sent  back  in  safety  to  Jamestown,  rather  as  an 
ally  than  a  prisoner. 

Such  was  the  tale  of  Smith's  imprisonment,  which  he  sent 
home  to  the  friends  of  Virginia  in  England.  A  later  account 
gives  us  a  far  more  thrilling  and  romantic  story.  There  Smith 
is  kept  in  fear  of  his  life,  feasted  indeed,  but  doubting  whether 
the  hospitality  shown  him  did  not  forshadow  his  sacrifice.  He 
is  then  made  the  object  of  "strange  and  hideous  ceremonies," 
and  his  courage  apparently  tested  by  supposed  supernatural  ter- 
rors. The  rescue  of  Smith  in  the  very  moment  of  execution  by 
the  melodramatic  intervention  of  the  beautiful  Pocahontas  has 
long  done  duty  as  the  one  episode  which  relieves  the  prosaic 
monotony  of  early  Virginian  history.      Its  romance  is  somewhat 


VISIT  TO  POWHATAN.  I2i 

impaired  by  the  knowledge  that  Pocahontas  could  have  been 
only  about  twelve  years  old  at  the  time,  and  it  is  at  least  singu- 
lar that  the  incident  was  never  published  to  the  world,  till  the 
career  of  "  the  Lady  Rebecca  "  had  invested  her  with  a  peculiar 
interest. 

In  truth,  it  would  seem  as  if  Smith's  life  was  in  greater  danger 
from  his  countrymen  after  his  return  than  it  had  ever  been  from 
Further  his  captors.  That  the  deposition  of  Wingfield  was  not 
Jamestown,  the  result  of  a  factious  combination  between  Smith  and 
RatclifTe  is  clearly  shown  by  the  conduct  of  the  latter  on  Smith's 
return.  He  accused  Smith  of  being  guilty,  according  to  the  Le- 
vitical  law,  of  the  death  of  his  two  followers,  slain  by  Opechan- 
canough.1  RatclifTe  appears  to  have  been  the  mere  tool  of  Archer, 
and  Smith's  life  was  in  danger,  when,  happily,  Newport  landeti 
with  a  supply.  His  arrival  was  in  every  way  opportune,  for  either 
before  or  immediately  after  it,  Jamestown  was  burned  down.2  He 
was  able  in  a  measure  to  repair  the  loss  from  the  ships'  stores, 
and  his  crew  were  employed  in  building  a  public  storehouse  and 
church.  Newport  seems  to  have  been  the  one  man  who  could 
enforce  some  degree  of  discipline  on  the  unruly  settlement.  The 
colonists  were  set  to  work,  and  order  was  so  far  established  that 
Newport  ventured  to  leave  Jamestown,  and,  in  company  with 
Smith,  to  make  an  exploring  journey  into  the  Indian  country.3 

Whatever  may  have  been  Smith's  relations  with  the  Indians,  it 
is  clear  that  they  were  not  prompted  by  personal  ambition  on 
Newport's  his  part.  During  his  previous  intercourse  with  Pow- 
Powhatan.*  hatan  he  had  impressed  on  the  chief  the  greatness  of 
his  absent  father,  as  he  called  Newport,5  and  he  now  seems  to 
have  contentedly  taken  a  second  place.  Newport,  as  before,  was 
lavish  in  his  liberality  to  the  savages,  and  in  dealing  with  Pow- 
hatan acquiesced  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Indian  that  it  did  not 
befit  great  chiefs  to  higgle  about  trifles.  Smith  perceived  that 
Powhatan's  declaration  was  but  a  pretext  for  extortion.  Luckily, 
however,  the  Indian  showed  a  childish  desire  for  some  blue  beads, 
and  Smith,  by  representing  them  as  the  special  insignia  of  Eng- 
lish royalty,  succeeded  in  obtaining  a  large  supply  of  corn  on 
favorable  terms.     After  parting  from  Powhatan  the  English  went 

1  Smith's  True  Relation. 

s  Afch.  Am.,  vol.  iv.  p.  95.  3  lb.,  p.  97. 

4  Our  knowledge  of  this  visit  is  derived  from  Smith's  True  Relation. 

6  True  Relation.  On  this  point  there  is  no  discrepancy  between  Smith's  earlier  and  later 
accounts. 


! 22  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 

to  visit  Opechancanough,  by  whom  they  were  well  received,  and 
from  whom  more  blue  beads  obtained  a  further  supply  of  corn. 

On  Newport's  return  a  fresh  trouble  ensued.  One  of  the  set- 
tlers, Martin,  believed  that  he  had  discovered  a  gold  mine.  We 
Supposed  are  reminded  of  the  infatuation  of  Frobisher's  follow- 
fovery?"  ers,  when  we  read  of  "  no  talk,  no  hope,  no  work,  but 
dig  gold,  work  gold,  refine  gold,  and  load  gold."  *  Smith,  if  we 
may  believe  his  own  account,  protested  against  this  delusion. 
Moreover,  he  was  anxious  to  get  the  ship  freighted  and  dis- 
patched. Beside  the  tax  imposed  on  the  settlement  by  the  main- 
tenance of  the  crew,  their  presence  seems  to  have  been  a  source 
of  idleness  and  profligacy.  The  ship  became,  in  Smith's  phrase, 
a  floating  tavern.2  At  length  Newport  sailed,  taking  with  him 
Wingfield  and  Archer. 

Their  departure  did  not  at  first  mend  matters.  Martin  and 
Ratcliffe,  according  to  Smith's  account,  wanted  to  appropriate  the 
Further  public  stores.  Powhatan,  too,  had  traded  on  Newport's 
troubles.*  liberality  to  obtain  swords  from  the  English,  and  now 
repeated  the  attempt  with  Smith.  Smith's  refusal  offended  the 
savage,  and  the  English  had  to  put  up  with  various  acts  of  petty 
hostility.  Smith  again  figures  in  his  own  story  as  the  champion 
and  deliverer  of  the  settlement.  Ratcliffe  and  Martin  were  for 
mild  measures,  but  Smith  insisted  on  severity,  and  captured  and 
flogged  some  of  the  principal  offenders,  only  releasing  them  at 
the  request  of  an  embassy  headed  by  Powhatan's  daughter,  "the 
nonpareil  of  her  nation."  Here,  again,  we  cannot  but  suspect 
that  we  have  another  chapter  in  the  Pocahontas  romance. 

Soon  after  Newport's  departure  another  ship  arrived.  Through 
the  providence  of  her  captain,  Nelson,  who  had  laid  in  abundant 

Smith  stores,  she  was  able  to  give  seasonable  relief  to  the  set- 
becomes  •  .  .  ..  .  ,  . 
President,  tiers.  Again  a  dispute  arose  between  Smith  and  Mar- 
tin as  to  freighting  the  ship  with  cedar  or  gold  dust.  Smith's 
view  prevailed,  and  perhaps  in  consequence,  Martin,  the  chief 
advocate  of  the  supposed  gold  discoveries,  sailed  with  Nelson  for 
England.  After  their  departure,  Smith  devoted  seven  weeks  to 
exploring  the  shores  of  the  bay  and  the  Potomac  river.  On  his 
return  he  found  matters  in  confusion.  The  new-comers  whom 
Nelson  had  brought  out  had  all  fallen  sick.     Ratcliffe's  folly  and' 

1  Smith,  p.  53,  2  lb.,  p.  52. 

•  Our  knowledge  of  all  that  occurs  between  Newport's  departure  and  Smith's  accident  is 
derived  from  Smith's  History. 


SMITHS  EXPLORTIONS. 


23 


injustice  had  produced  a  mutiny.  Smith's  return  appears  to  have 
restored  peace.  Ratcliffe  was  deposed,  and  Smith  became  the 
titular,  as  he  had  been  for  some  time  the  virtual,  head  of  the  set- 
tlement. His  first  proceeding  was  to  depute  his  authority  to 
Scrivener,  who  had  come  out  with  Newport  and  had  already  taken 
a  leading  part  in  public  works  at  Jamestown.  Smith  then  re- 
sumed his  exploration  of  the  bay.  '  The  first  noteworthy  feature 
of  his  f  oyage  was  the  discovery  of  the  Susquehannocks,  a  tribe 
of  vast  stature,  who  worshiped  the  sun,  but,  according  to  Smith's 
account,  readily  transferred  their  adoration  to  himself.  They 
were  altogether  independent  of  Powhatan,  and  must  have  had  a 
somewhat  extensive  communication  with  their  northern  neigh- 
bors, if  it  be  true  that  their  hatchets  originally  came  from  the 
French  settlers  in  Canada.  The  rest  of  the  expedition  is  too  full 
of  romantic  episodes  for  us  to  accept  it  without  question  on  no 
better  authority  than  that  of  the  principal  actor.  Smith's  account, 
and  we  have  no  other,  presents  him  to  us  as  a  sort  of  prosaic 
knight-errant,  leading  his  little  force  safely  through  all  the  dan- 
gers of  ambushes  and  savage  warfare,  deciding  Indian  wars  by 
his  alliance,  and  adjusting  the  terms  of  peace.  After  leaving  the 
Susquehannocks,  so  runs  Smith's  tale,  the  English  passed  into  the 
lands  of  another  friendly  tribe,  the  Moraughtacund  Indians. 
Their  warning  to  avoid  the  neighboring  country  of  the  Rapahan- 
nocks  was  disregarded,  under  the  idea  that  it  proceeded  from  a 
jealous  wish  to  monopolize  the  English  trade.  The  caution 
proved,  however,  to  have  been  well  founded.  The  English  fell 
into  an  ambush  and  were  attacked,  but  escaped  without  loss. 
Returning  to  their  friends  at  Moraughtacund,  they  joined  them  hi 
an  expedition  against  their  foes,  reduced  them  to  submission,  and 
took  part  in  a  solemn  ceremony,  at  which  Smith  acted  as  a  gen- 
eral peace-maker.  The  English  then  turned  homeward.  Before 
reaching  Jamestown  they  were  attacked  by  the  Nansemond  and 
Chesapeake  nations,  but  defeated  them  without  the  loss  of  a  man, 
and  exacted  a  boat-load  of  corn  as  compensation.  On  the  9th 
of  September  they  reached  Jamestown.  In  the  same  month 
Newport  again  landed  in  Virginia.  This  voyage  was  evidently 
intended  to  supplement  and  strengthen  the  infant  colony,  and  not 
merely  designed  for  trade  like  the  last.  Among  the  new-comers 
was  Francis  West,  whose  brother,  L^ord  Delaware,  was  among 
the  leading  members  of  the  Company.  Moreover,  there  was  a 
gentlewoman    Mrs.  Forrest,  with  her  ward,  the  first  of  their  sex 


I24  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 

who  had  settled  in  Virginia  since  the  ill-fated  Eleanor  Dare.  There 
were  also  eight  Poles  and  Germans,  who  were  intended  to  make 
pitch,  glass,  and  soap-ashes.  In  fact  it  seemed  as  if  the  Com- 
pany considered  that  the  first  band  under  Wingfield  were  pioneers 
to  lay  the  foundation  of  a  settlement,  and  as  if  the  real  social 
and  economical  life  of  the  colony  was  now  to  begin. 

At  the  same  time  the  Company  expressed  its  dissatisfaction 
with  the  paltry  results  hitherto  achieved,^  a  letter  addressed  to 
The  com-    Smith.     To  this  he  replied  in  a  temperate  and  sensible 
FoTimme"  tone>  reminding  the  Company  of  the  difficulties  which 
diate  gain,   beset  an  infant  colony,  and  the  impossibility  of  at  once 
assuring  the  prosperity  and  stability  of  the  settlement,  and  obtain- 
ing profitable  results.1  [.The  dispute  illustrates  the  dangers  which 
attend  an  undertaking  like  that  of  the  Virginia  Company.     Such 
a  body  can  seldom,  if  ever,  raise  its  aims  above  immediate  gain, 
or  regard  the  permanent  welfare  of  the  settlement  as  more  than  a 
secondary  object,  f  The  dealings  of  the  Virginia  Company  with 
its  servants  in  the  time  of  Sir  Thomas  Smith  are  not  unlike  those 
of  the  East  India  Company  in  its  early  days.     Its  servants  are 
at  once  instructed  to  administer  affairs  with  a  strict  view  to  jus- 
tice and  to  the  good  of  the  community,  and  to  satisfy  the  de- 
mands of  the  shareholders.     There  is  not  much  doubt  which  half 
of  the  instruction  will  be  accepted  as  the  more  important.     The 
Company's  orders  to  Newport  furnished  another  example  of  the 
mischief  caused  by  the  need  of  some  immediate  and  showy  result. 
He  was  instructed  to  discover  either  a  lump  of  gold,  a  passage 
to  the  South  Sea,  or  some  of  Raleigh's  lost  colonists.2     The  labor 
devoted  to  any  one  of  these  objects  would  have  been  far  better 
spent  in   building   houses,  clearing  ground,  and   growing  corn. 
Another  point  in  Newport's  orders  excited  Smith's  indignation, 
perhaps  with  less  justice.     He  was  furnished  with  certain  presents 
for  Powhatan,  valuable  according  to  the  standard  of  a  savage, 
and  was  instructed   to  go  through   the  ceremony  of  formally 
crowning  the  Indian  chief.     The  latter  was  an  idle  piece  of  for- 
mality, like  the  creation  of  a  Virginian  peerage  for  the  benefit  of 
Manteo.     But  the  English  policy  towards  Powhatan  had  at  least 
the  merit  of  winning  and  retaining  the  loyalty  of  the  savage. 
After  the  ceremony  of  Powhatan's  coronation  had  been  accom- 
plished, not  without  some  reluctance  on  the  part  of  the  chief 

1  Smith's  answer  is  published  in  his  History,  p.  70.     From  this  it  is  easy  to  gather  the 
general  subject  of  the  Company's  remonstrance. 
8  Smith,  p.  fS. 


THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY.  l2$ 

performer,  Newport  set  forth  on  his  exploration.  No  discovery 
either  of  the  South  Sea,  the  lost  colonists,  or  gold  rewarded  his 
labors,  and  he  returned  to  Jamestown  after  an  uneventful  journey 
which  bore  no  fruit,  either  for  good  or  ill.1  In  the  mean  time 
Smith  was  more  usefully  employed  in  freighting  the  ship  with 
timber  and  wood-ashes,  and  in  testing  the  possibility  of  manufact- 
uring pitch  and  glass.2  Soon  after  Newport's  return  the  ship 
sailed,  carrying  Smith's  remonstrance  to  the  Company.  Amongst 
those  who  returned  was  Ratcliffe,  whose  unpopularity,  if  Smith 
is  to  be  believed,  made  it  unsafe  for  him  to  stay  in  the  colony.3 

Hitherto  the  founders  and  supporters  of  the  colony  had  little 
cause  to  congratulate  themselves  on  their  success.  From  an 
Prospers  economical  point  of  view,  the  profits  had  been  as  good 
colony  in  as  could  t>e  reasonably  expected,  far  better,  indeed, 
England,  when  we  consider  the  material  of  which  the  colony 
was  made.  But  in  every  other  respect  the  result  was  utterly  dis- 
couraging. The  history  of  the  settlement  almost  from  the  time 
it  left  Plymouth  had  been  a  succession  of  quarrels.  As  might 
have  been  foreseen,  the  air  of  Virginia  could  work  no  charm  to 
turn  wild  spendthrifts  into  hard-working  settlers.  The  colony 
had  been  saved  from  famine,  perhaps  from  massacre,  by  the  en- 
ergy and  courage  of  one  man.  In  the  short  space  of  a  year  and 
a  half,  two  Presidents  had  been  deposed.  What  wonder  if,  in 
the  plays  of  the  day,  Virginia  figured  as  a  Transatlantic  Alsatia, 
the  last  refuge  of  the  destitute  and  dishonest.4  But  the  influences 
at  work  on  behalf  of  this  colony  were  strong  enough  to  overcome 
the  discouragements,  and  the  men  who  had  undertaken  to  settle 
Virginia  were  not  to  be  laughed  out  of  their  scheme,  or  disheart- 
ened by  a  single  failure.     The  critical  nature  of  the  occasion 

1  Our  knowledge  of  Newport's  voyage  is  derived  from  Smith's  History.  Had  the  expedi- 
tion been  conducted  by  Smith  himself,  some  more  impressive  episodes  would  probably  be 
recorded. 

2  Smith,  p.  70.  8  lb.,  p.  72. 

4  We  find  in  the  contemporary  pamphlets  on  behalf  of  Virginia,  more  than  one  remon- 
strance with  the  play-writers  of  the  day  for  their  disrespectful  treatment  of  Virginia.  Thus 
in  the  New  Life  of  Virginia,  published  in  1612,  by  authority  of  the  Council  for  Virginia,  and 
republished  in  Force,  vol.  i.,  we  read  how  "  The  malitious  and  looser  sort  (being  accompan- 
ied with  the  licentious  vaine  of  stage  poets)  have  whet  their  tongues  with  scornful  taunts 
against  the  action  itselfe."  Strachey  again,  in  a  prayer  drawn  up  apparently  for  the  use  of 
the  colony,  and  published  in  Force,  vol.  iii.,  denounces  M  Sanballats  and  Tobias,  Papists 
and  Players,  and  such  like  Amorites  and  Heronites,  the  scum  and  dregs  of  the  earth."  The 
only  passage  I  have  met  with  to  which  these  charges  are  applicable  is  in  Fletcher's  The  No- 
hle  Gentleman,  Act  1,  Sc.  i.,  where  a  husband  being  asked  to  bring  his  wife  to  court,  says  : — 
"  Sir,  I  had  rather  send  her  to  Virginia 
To  help  to  propagate  the  English  Nation." 
A  little  later  Virginia  figured  not  ungracefully  in  more  than  one  mask. 


I26  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY 

seems  to  have  roused  them  to  fresh  efforts.  The  year  1609  saw 
an  outburst  of  energy  and  activity  from  which  the  beginning  of 
English  colonization  may  be  almost  said  to  date.  Sermons  were 
preached,  and  pamphlets  published,  putting  forward  the  claims 
of  the  colony.  From  one  of  the  latter,  entitled  "  Nova  Britan- 
nia,"1 we  may  form  a  good  idea  of  the  nature  of  these  appeals. 
The  writer,  probably  himself  one  of  the  original  shareholders, 
sets  forth  the  charms  of  Virginia,  its  fertility,  its  stores  of  miner- 
als and  timber,  of  silk  and  furs.  "  The  natives  are  generally 
very  loving,  and  do  entertain  and  relieve  our  people  with  great 
kindness."  He  then  dwells  on  "  the  swarms  of  idle  persons  which 
having  no  means  of  labour  to  relieve  their  misery,  do  likewise 
swarme  in  lewde  and  naughty  practices,  so  that  if  we  seeke  not 
some  waies  for  their  forreine  employment,  we  must  provide 
shortly  more  prisons  and  corrections  for  their  bad  conditions." 
Recent  experience  might  have  shown  that  bad  subjects  at  home 
become  worse  in  a  colony.  The  writer,  however,  qualifies  his 
statement.  "  I  do  not  mean  that  none  but  such  unsound  mem- 
bers, and  such  poor  as  want  their  bread,  are  fittest  for  this  em- 
ployment." Especially  would  the  colony  be  valuable  as  opening 
a  fresh  market  for  English  cloth  and  "  raising  againe  of  that  ancient 
trade  of  clothing  so  much  decayed  in  England."  Our  naviga- 
tion is  to  revive,  and  the  glories  of  the  last  reign  are  to  return. 
"  We  shall  not  still  betake  ourselves  to  small  and  little  shipping 
as  we  daily  do  beginne,  but  we  shall  rear  againe  such  Marchants 
Shippes  both  tall  and  stout,  as  no  forreine  sayle  that  swimmes 
shall  make  them  vayle  or  stoop ;  whereby  to  make  this  little 
northern  corner  of  the  world  to  be  in  a  short  time  the  richest 
storehouse  and  staple  for  marchandise  in  all  Europe." 

If  these  soaring  hopes  were  to  be  fulfilled,  the  whole  organiza- 
tion of  the  colony  needed  to  be  shaped  afresh.  One  great  de- 
Change  in    feet  in  the  existing  constitution  was  that  it  withheld  all 

the  consti-      .  .        . 

tution  of  share  in  the  management  of  the  colony  from  the  real 
pany.  promoters,  the  patentees,  and  entrusted  it  to  a  body 

of  men  who  were  in  no  wise  specially  interested  in  the  success  of 
the  undertaking.  Moreover,  it  was  clear  that  the  control  of  the 
emigrants  must  be  vested  in  men  of  greater  influence  and  higher 
station  than  Smith  and  Wingfield.  It  was  evident,  too,  that  the 
system  of  double  government,  by  two  Councils,  one  resident  and 
the  other  non-resident,  was  thoroughly  unsatisfactory.     In  the 

1  Republished  in  Force,  vol.  i. 


THE  COMPANY  RECONSTITUTED.  [27 

spring  of  1609,  a  new  system  was  established  remedying  these 
evils.  Who  was  the  immediate  author  of  the  change  does  not 
appear.  On  the  23d  of  May,  a  charter  was  granted  to  the  Com- 
pany, constituting  it  a  corporation,  and  specifying  all  its  members 
by  name.1  Every  rank,  profession,  and  trade  supplied  representa- 
tives. The  list  is  headed  by  Salisbury,  and  the  name  of  Bacon 
appears  here  as  it  does  in  the  East  India  Company.  The  sub- 
scriptions were  not  confined  to  individuals,  as  all,  or  nearly  all, 
of  the  London  companies  appear  in  the  list.  Taken  altogether, 
the  constitution  of  the  company  betokens  a  wide-spread  interest 
and  confidence  in  the  success  of  the  undertaking.  By  this  char- 
ter  the  extent  of  the  plantation  was  more  exactly  defined  than  by  | 
the  former  instrument.  It  was  to  extend-  along  the  coast  two 
hundred  miles  on  each  side  of  Cape  Comfort,  and  inland  for  one 
hundred  miles.  The  whole  constitution  of  the  colony  and  the 
company  was  remodeled.  The  government  was  vested  in  a 
Treasurer  and  Council,  composed  of  members  of  the  company. 
Sir  Thomas  Smith  was  appointed  Treasurer.  '  The  Council  was 
to  be  originally  nominated  by  the  king,  but  vacancies  in  it  were 
to  be  filled  up  by  a  vote  of  the  whole  company.  AH  legislative 
power,  and  the  right  to  appoint  colonial  officers,  was  vested  in 
the  Council.  The  company  was  given  full  sovereignty  over  all 
British  subjects  who  might  settle  in  Virginia.  It  had  the  right  to 
export  settlers,  and  was  to  enjoy  immunity  from  all  duties,  except 
five  per  cent,  customs,  for  twenty-one  years.  '  It  was  also  emv 
powered  to  wage  defensive  war  by  sea  and  land,  and  to  exact  a 
duty  upon  all  imports  and  exports  of  five  per  cent,  from  British 
subjects,  and  ten  per  cent,  from  aliens,  the  prbceeds  as  before  to 
accrue  to  the  company  for  twenty-one  years,  and  then  to  the 
Crown.  Virtually  the  company  was  established  as  an  independ- 
ent community  governed  by  a  representative  body.  .  .  . 
1  The  best  idea  of  the  plans  of  the  company,  and  of  the  system 
In  which  it  was  constructed,  may  perhaps  be  gained  from  the 
(pamphlet  to  which  I  have  already  referred.  The  stock  was  to  be 
:aken  up  in  shares  of  12/.  \os.  each.  Personal  emigration  in  the 
service  of  the  company  was  to  be  equivalent  to  the  price  of  one 
share.  All  "extraordinary  men,"  divines,  public  officers," physi- 
cians and  others,  were  to  receive  a  certain  number  of  shares  pro- 
portioned to  the  supposed  value  of  their  services.     The  proceeds 

1  This  document  is  to  be  found  in  the  Col.  Entry  Book,  lxxix.  p.  49,  and  in  the  Appendix 
toStith.  •  v 


I23  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 

were  to  be  spent  upon  the  settlement,  and  the  surplus  was  either 
to  be  divided  or  funded  for  seven  years.  During  that  period  the 
settlers  were  to  be  maintained  at  the  expense  of  the  company, 
while  all  the  product  of  their  labors  was  to  be  cast  into  the  com- 
mon stock.  At  the  end  of  that  time  every  shareholder  was  to 
receive  a  grant  of  land  in  proportion  to  his  stock  held.  Those 
shares  which  had  been  taken  up  later  than  1609  were  to  suffer  a 
proportionate  diminution.  The  company,  as  thus  designed,  was 
to  be  a  vast  joint-stock  farm  or  collection  of  farms  worked  by 
servants  who  were  to  receive,  in  return  for  their  labor,  all  their 
necessaries  and  a  share  in  the  proceeds  of  the  undertaking.  How 
far  the  company  contemplated  the  possibility  of  private  farms  in 
the  territory  under  their  jurisdiction  seems*  doubtful.  The  pro- 
vision of  the  charter  which  empowered  the  company  to  levy  duty 
on  all  imports  and  exports,  would  seem  to  suppose  the  possibility 
of  private  trade,  and  the  records  seem  to  show  faint  traces  of  such 
undertakings. 

At  first  one  is  inclined  to  think  that  the  company  would  have 
done  better  to  allot  private  holdings  of  land  at  once,  reserving  for 
themselves  rents  and  custom  duties,  or  to  adopt  a  system  of 
mttayer  tenure,  and  in  either  case  to  have  trusted  the  future  of 
the  colony  to  the  stimulus  of  private  enterprise.  But  it  must  be 
remembered  that  the  company  deliberately  laid  its  account  to 
managing  what  was  little  better  than  a  penal  settlement.  Many 
of  the  emigrants  were  sure  to  be  men  who  could  be  made  to  work 
by  nothing  short  of  a  slave-gang  system.  If  the  company  had 
kept  to  the  plan  on  which  they  started,  Virginia  never  could  have 
become  a  flourishing  community,  but  it  is  not  at  all  certain  that 
they  did  not,  from  a  merely  economical  and  commercial  point  of 
view,  act  with  wisdom. 

To  such  good  purpose  did  the  friends  of  the  colony  plead  its 
cause,  both  in  the  press  and  the  pulpit,  that,  in  spijte  of  the 
The  voyage  somewhat  discouraging  conditions  of  service,  five  hun- 
of  1609.1       ^red  emigrants  were  collected.     The  character  of  the 

1  We  have  two  contemporary  accounts  of  this  voyage  and  of  the  discovery  of  the  Bermu- 
das, both  written  by  men  who  took  part  in  the  voyage.  One  is  by  William  Strachey,  and  is 
entitled  A  true  Report  of  the  Wrecke  and  Redemption  of  Sir  Thomae  Gates,  Knight,  upon 
and  from  the  Hands  of  the  Bermudas,  his  coming  to  Virginia,  and  the  estate  of  that  Colo- 
nic then  and  after  under  the  government  of  the  Lord  La  Ware,  published  in  Purchas,  vol. 
iv.  p.  1734.  The  other  is  entitled  A  Plain  Description  of  the  Bermudas,  published  in  1615 
and  republished,  Force,  vol.  iii.  Strachey 's  account  is  written  in  a  style  of  considerable  lit- 
erary pretension.  It  is  at  times  turgid,  but  on  the  whole  powerful  and  graphic.  The  other 
account  is  a  far  more  homely  performance  and  perhaps  the  more  trustworthy  of  t h< 


DISCOVERY  OF  THE  BERMUDAS.  129 

m 

men  to  whom  the  management  of  the  colony  was  now  entrusted 
was  a  guarantee  for  a  vigorous  and  upright  policy.  Lord  Dela- 
ware had  been  in  the  spring  appointed  Captain- General  and 
Governor  of  the  English  colonies  to  be  planted  in  Virginia.  For 
the  present,  however,  he  was  willing  to  leave  the  control  of  the 
colony  to  the  most  experienced  and  capable  members  of  the 
company,  and  the  command  of  the  present  expedition  was  en- 
trusted to  Gates,  Somers,  and  Newport.  Ratcliffe,  despite  his 
previous  failure,  returned  with  them.  On  the  1st  of  June  they 
set  sail  with  a  fleet  of  nine  vessels.  In  the  very  hour  of  departure 
a  dispute  broke  out  between  the  three  leaders  which  in  its  results 
was  nearly  fatal  to  the  colony.  Being  unable  to  settle  the  ques- 
tion of  precedence,  they  decided  that  all  three  should  sail  in  one 
ship.  AbouF"ttie"  end  of  July  a  storm  scattered  the  fleet.  Seven 
out  of  the  nine  ships  at  length  reached  Virginia,  but  one  perished, 
and  the  Sea  Venture,  in  which  were  the  three  leaders,  was  com- 
pletely cut  off  from  the  rest  of  the  fleet.  The  ship  was,  in  the 
words  of  one  of  her  crew,  "  so  shaken,  torn,  and  leaked,  that  she 
received  so  much  water  as  covered  two  ton  of  hogshead  about 
the  ballast."  For  five  days  the  crew  baled  and  pumped  "  with- 
out any  intermission,  and  yet  the  water  seemed  rather  to  increase 
than  to  diminish ;  insomuch  that  all  our  men  being  utterly  spent, 
tyred  and  disabled  for  longer  labour,  were  even  resolved,  without 
any  hope  of  their  lives,  to  shut  up  the  hatches,  and  to  have  com- 
mitted themselves  to  the  mercy  of  the  sea."  Some  sank  down, 
utterly  exhausted,  and  slept:  others  stupefied  themselves  with 
strong  drink.1  But  there  was  at  least  one  man  on  board  who  had 
been  trained  in  a  school  where  death  was  no  stranger,  and  who 
did  not  think  that  a  man  could  face  it  best  drunk  or  sleeping. 
As  undaunted  as  when  in  the  prime  of  manhood  he  had  fought 
his  way  up  the  cliffs  above  St.  Jago,  Somers  sat  for  three  days 
and  nights  on  the  poop,  scarcely  eating  or  drinking,  using  all  his 
skill  to  keep  the  vessel  upright  and  save  her  from  foundering. 
When  everything  seemed  hopeless  a  cry  of  "  land  "  from  Somers 
I  roused  the  crew  from  their  despair.  By  dint  of  hard  pumping 
the  ship  was  kept  above  water  till  within  half  a  mile  of  shore, 
where,  "fortunately  in  so  great  a  misfortune,"  she  stuck  fast 
between  two  rocks.     The  whole  company,  one  hundred  and  fifty 

1  "Some  of  them  having  good  and  comfortable  waters  in  the  ship  fetcht  them  and  drunke 
one  to  the  other,  taking  their  last  leave  one  of  the  other  until  their  more  joyful  and  happy 
meeting  in  a  more  blessed  world." — Plain  Description,  p.  10.  The  quaintly  euphemistic 
language  suggests  that  the  writer  was  himself  an  actor  in  this  part  of  the  affair. 

9 


I30  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 

in  number,  landed  in  safety,  with  a  good  part  of  their  furniture, 
which  the  sea  had  spared,  and  most  of  the  gear  from  the  ship. 
f  The  land  proved  to  be  the  Bermudas,  a  "  land  never  inhabited 
by  any  Christian  or  heathen  people,"  and  a  name  of  dread- tc 
Discovery    seamen  of  those  days  as  "  ever  esteemed  am 
Bermudas,  a  most  prodigious  and  enchanted  place,  afford  j 
ing  but  gusts,  storms,  and   foul  weather."1     The  island, 
ever,  completely  belied  its  evil  reputation.     It  was  foun  I 
very  garden  of  nature,  "  the  richest,  healthfullest,  and  m 
ing  land  as  ever  man  put  foot  upon."2     The  energy  of  . 
ers  supplied  his  companions  with  abundance  of  fish  and  hog's 
flesh,  to  which  they  soon  added  turtles,  wild-fowl,  and 
fruits.     The  island  gave  promise  of  abundant  resources  to  r 
it  a  possession  of  permanent  value.     Pearls  and  amben 
of  the  best  quality,  abounded,  and  whales  were  seen  in  nur 
off  the  shore.     For  ten  months  the  emigrants  stayed  o 
island,  during  which  time  two  children  were  born  and  i 
riage  solemnized.     Meanwhile  the  leaders  of  the  exped 
not  forget  their  original  object.     Two  pinnaces  were  t 
fitted  as  well  as  they  could  be  with  the  gear  saved  from  tl 
of  the  Sea  Venture.     These  were  stored  with  salted  he 
and  other  food,  and  on  the  ioth  of  May  the  voyagers  set  sai 
Virginia. 

On  their  arrival  there  a  discouraging  spectacle  met  their 
From  the  time  of  Newport's  departure  in  1608  everything 
state  of       g°ne  amiss  with  the  settlement.     Powhatan,  if 
menteofle"    believe  Smith's  account,  was  perpetually  intriguii 
Virginia.'    get  the  settlers  in  his  power,  though  his  devices 
baffled  by  the  craft  and  courage  of  the  President.     The  treach- 
ery of  the  Indians  was  abetted  by  some  Germans  whon 
had  sent  to  Powhatan  to  build  him  a  stone  house,  and  wh« 
ingly  preferred  his  interests  to  the  welfare  of  the  English. 
hontas,  it  is  almost  needless  to  say,  figures  throughout  the  s 
the  good  genius  of  the  settlers,  warning  them  of  the  hostile  s< 
of  her   countrymen.      Finally  the   hostility  of  Powhata 
averted  by  a  happy  accident.     An  Indian  prisoner  at  Jam< 
was  accidentally  stupefied  by  the  fumes  of  charcoal  and  was 
lieved  by  his  countrymen  to  be  dead.     Smith  restored  him  In 

1  Plain  Description,  p.  n.  2  f£m>  p.  1It 

3  Our  knowledge  of  this  period  is  derived  mainly  from  Smith's  History.     We  have  al  u 

letters,  one  from  Archer,  in  Purchas,  vol.  iv.  p.  1733,  the  other  from  Ratcliffe  to  Lor.. 

bury,  Col.  Papers,  Oct  4,  1609. 


DEPARTURE  OF  SMITH.  131 

application  of  aqua  vitse  and  vinegar.  The  supposed  resurrec- 
tion of  a  dead  man  impressed  the  Indians  with  a  deep  reverence 
for  the  supernatural  powers  of  their  enemy,  and  for  a  while  the 
settlement  enjoyed  an  immunity  from  attacks.  About  the  same 
time  the  material  condition  of  the  colony  seems  to  have  been 
brightened  by  a  transient  gleam  of  prosperity.  We  can  readily 
believe  the  statement  that  the  President,  true  to  his  old  military 
habits,  succeeded  in  establishing  regular  hours  of  labor,  and  that 
under  his  management  houses  were  built,  the  church  roofed,  and 
fishing  weirs  made.  Thirty  or  forty  acres  were  brought  under 
tillage,  and  the  live  stock  increased  rapidly.  Despite  this  it  was 
needful  to  divide  the  colony  by  sending  out  three  detachments 
to  the  oyster  fisheries  and  by  billeting  some  among  the  Indians. 
A  series  of  calamities  soon  robbed  the  colony  of  the  services  of 
its  ablest  members.  Scrivener,  who  had  acted  as  Smith's  dep- 
uty, was  upset  in  his  boat  while  trading  among  the  Indians  and 
was  drowned,  with  nine  others,  among  whom  was  a  brother  of 
Gosnold. 

In  May,  1609,  the  fleet  arrived,  having,  as  we  have  seen,  lost 
its  leaders.  This  addition  to  the  numbers  of  the  colony  seems  to 
Departure  nave  brought  nothing  but  misfortune.  Smith  describes 
of  Smith,  tne  new-comers  as  "  unruly  gallants,  packed  thither  by 
their  friends  to  escape  ill  destinies."  l 

The  old  enmity  of  Ratcliffe,  Archer,  and  Martin  towards  Smith 
again  made  itself  felt,  and  the  authority  which  the  President  had 
established  over  the  settlers  was  at  an  end.  The  folly  of  the  new- 
comers soon  involved  the  settlement  in  descreditable  squabbles 
with  the  natives.  The  formal  purchase  of  a  tract  of  land  from 
Powhatan,  with  the  understanding  that  each  of  its  inhabitants 
should  pay  a  tribute  of  corn  to  the  new-comers  on  condition  of 
being  protected  against  their  enemies,  the  Manakins,  is  the  only 
sensible  or  useful  transaction  recorded  during  this  time.  At 
length  an  accident  robbed  the  colony  of  the  one  man  who  was 
able  to  protect  it  from  danger  without,  and  to  enforce  some  de- 
gree of  order  within.  An  accidental  discharge  of  powder  in- 
jured Smith  so  severely  that  he  was  forced  to  return  to  England, 
never  to  revisit  Virginia.2  With  all  his  boastfulness  and  arro- 
gance, his  services  to  the  colony  had  been  solid  and  valuable. 

1  Smith,  p.  90. 

2  According  to  Ratcliffe,  he  was  sent  home  to  stand  his  trial.  Archer  does  not  confirm  this, 
but  refers  to  dissensions  for  which  Smith  was  to  blame. 


r32  THE   VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

The  positions  of  authority  and  trust  that  he  afterwards  ^filled  are 
in  themselves  sufficient  proof  that  his  colonial  career  was  highly 
esteemed  in  his  own  age,  and  though  the  special  incidents  with 
which  popular  belief  has  associated  his  name  may  be  fabulous, 
yet  it  is  no  unjust  chance  which  has  given  him  the  foremost  place 
in  the  early  history  of  Virginia. 

After  Smith's  departure,  the  post  of  President  devolved  on 
Percy.  That  amid  all  the  complaints  and  abuse  which  were  in- 
wretched  discriminate^  heaped  upon  the  leading  men  of  the  col- 
the  colony  ony,  his  character  should  have  escaped,  is  in  itself  high 
Percy.»  testimony  to  his  conduct.  But  his  health  was  so  fee- 
ble that  he  had  nothing  more  than  the  weight  of  his  name  where- 
with to  enforce  his  authority.  As  might  have  been  expected  in 
such  a  community,  that  proved  unavailing,  and  utter  anarchy  and 
destitution  ensued.  The  Indians  slew  the  settlers'  hogs,  and  cut 
off  any  stragglers  from  the  fort.  Ratcliffe,  who  had  gone  in  com- 
mand of  a  foraging  party,  was  entrapped  into  an  ambush  by  the 
Indians  and  killed,  with  thirty  of  his  men.  The  outward  aspect  of 
the  colony  proclaimed  its  state  of  anarchy  and  distress.  Jamestown 
looked  more  like  the  ruin  of  an  ancient  fortress  than  an  inhab- 
ited town.  The  palisade  was  torn  down,  and  the  gates  off  their 
hinges.  Rows  of  deserted  houses  told  of  the  mortality  which 
had  thinned  the  settlement,  while  their  shattered  timbers,  torn 
and  broken  for  firewood,  bore  witness  to  the  sloth  and  thriftless- 
ness  of  the  survivors. 

Such  was  the  spectacle  which  met  the  eyes  of  Gates  and  Som- 
ers  on  their  arrival  from  the  Bermudas.  As  might  be  supposed, 
intended      the  new-comers  found  themsejves  unable  to  bring  about 

break-up  of  .       .         .  ~       T7.  r    \ 

the  colony .2  any  lasting  improvement.  Luckily  some  part  of  the 
stores  brought  from  the  Bermudas  still  remained,  and  the  vessels 
at  command  were  enough  to  embark  the  whole  colony.  A  con- 
sultation was  held,  and  it  was  found  that  the  stores  could  not  last 
for  more  than  sixteen  days.  To  break  up  the  colony  was  a  hope- 
less confession  of  defeat,  a  step  only  to  be  taken  in  the  last  ex- 

1  Our  knowledge  of  the  internal  condition  of  the  colony  after  Smith's  departure  is  derived 
from:  i.  Percy's  account  in  Purchas.  vol.  iv.  ch.  2.  2.  The  report  of  Gates  and  Somers  on 
their  arrival.  The  latter  is  found  in  a  letter  from  Lord  Delaware  and  his  council  to  the  Lon- 
don Company,  published  in  Mr.  Major's  introduction  to  Strachey's  Travayle  into  Virginia. 
3.  A  pamphlet  published  in  1620  by  authority  of  the  Company,  entitled  A  Declaration  of  the 
State  of  tfie  Colony  in  Virginia.  Republished  in  Force,  vol.  iii.  4.  Strachey's  account 
•bove  referred  to.  We  have  also  a  statement  drawn  up  in  1624  at  the  time  of  the  attacks  on 
the  Company,  entitled  A  Brief  Declaration  of  Virginia.  It  appears  to  have  been  written 
Ay  one  of  the  original  colonists.     It  is  epitomized  in  the  "  Colonial  Papers." 

*  Delaware's  letter,  p.  xxvii.     Strachey  in  Purchas,  vol.  iv.  p.  1752. 


ARRIVAL  OF  DELA  WARE. 


1 33 


tremity,  yet  to  stay  meant  to  die  of  famine.  Accordingly,  the 
settlers  decided  to  embark  in  the  two  pinnaces,  and  to  make  for 
Newfoundland,  where,  as  it  was  now  the  fishing  season,  they 
might  find  supplies,  and  get  shipping  for  England.  A  proposal 
to  burn  Jamestown  was  resisted  by  Gates,  and  on  the  7th  of  June, 
at  noon,  the  settlers,  with  a  salvo  of  small  arms,  bade  farewell  to 
the  colony.  At  that  moment  it  might  have  seemed  to  the  most 
sanguine  as  if  an  impassable  barrier  was  set  up  against  the  set- 
tlement of  Virginia.  Each  attempt  had  been  more  costly  than 
the  one  before  it,  and  each  had  miscarried  more  miserably.  Laneis, 
colonists  had  returned  as  they  went,  baffled  only  by  inexperience 
and  weakness,  and  having  done  their  duty  as  pioneers.  White's- 
had  failed  through  no  fault  of  their  own,  but  through  the  sloth 
and  folly  of  those  who  should  have  succored  them.  The  present 
settlers  had  received  every  help  and  every  care  that  they  could 
ask,  the  wisest  and  richest  men  of  the  age  had  lavished  thought, 
energy,  and  money  on  the  colony,  and  this  was  the  end.  The 
very  magnitude  of  the  undertaking  made  the  failure  more  final, 
and  any  attempt  at  a  revival  more  hopeless.  At  length,  however, 
in  its  darkest  hour,  a  gleam  of  good  fortune  visited  the  luckless 
settlement. 

Early  in  the  spring  of  i6io,JDelaware  had  determined  to  sail 
in  person  for  Virginia  with  three  ships.  In  a  sermon  preached  at 
Arrival  of  tne  Temple  Church,  William  Crashaw  bade  him  God 
Delaware.  Speed9  as  0ne  "  whom  God  had  stirred  up  to  neglect 
the  pleasures  of  England,  and  with  Abraham  to  go  from  thy  coun- 
try, and  forsake  thy  kindred,  and  thy  father's  house  to  go  to  a  land 
which  God  will  show  thee";  and  reminded  him  how  "his  ancestor 
had  taken  a  king  prisoner  in  the  fields,  in  his  own  land,"  while  it  was 
left  to  him,  "  by  the  godly  managing  of  this  business,  to  take  the 
devil  prisoner  in  open  field  and  in  his  own  kingdom." x  On  the 
10th  of  April  Delaware  sailed.2  After  a  rough  passage,  in  which 
the  ships  were  separated,  they  reached  Chesapeake  Bay.  The 
fleet  anchored  off  Cape  Comfort,  where,  in  Delaware's  own  phrase, 
"  we  met  with  much  cold  comfort."  The  commander  of  the  fort 
here  came  on  board  and  "  unfolded  a  strange  narrative  of  double 

1  Crashaw's  sermon  was  published,  seemingly  without  the  author's  consent  Mr.  Neil! 
gives  copious  extracts  from  it  in  his  English  Colonization,  p.  35. 

2  Our  authorities  for  Delaware's  voyage  are  his  own  letters  above  referred  to,  and  Stra- 
chey's  account  in  Purchas.  We  have  also  a  letter  from  Delaware  to  Lord 'Salisbury,  Colo- 
nial Papers ;  July,  1610,  and  one  from  Somers  to  Salisbury,  June  15.  Mr.  Major  adduces 
substantial  arguments  for  supposing  that  Delaware's  letter  to  the  Council  was  written  by 
Strachey. 


I34  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

qualities,  mixed  both  with  joy  and  sorrow."  He  told  them  of  the 
safe  arrival  of  Gates  and  Somers,  and  of  their  resolution  to  aban- 
don the  settlement.  Delaware,  on  hearing  this,  promptly  manned 
his  long-boat  and  sent  it  to  meet  and  stop  the  pinnaces.  On  the 
next  day  the  long-boat  met  Gates  near  Mulberry  Island.  The 
vessels  immediately  turned  up  stream,  and  were  brought  by  a  fa- 
vorable wind  to  Jamestown  that  night. 

Two  days  later  Delaware  himself  landed.  After  a  sermon  had 
been  preached,  he  caused  his  commission  to  be  read.  Gates  then 
state  of  deliver^  up  his  commission  with  both  patents  and 
under°lony  tne  sea*  °f  ^e  Council.  The  new  Governor  immedi- 
Deiaware.  ately  took  vigorous  measures  for  establishing  his  author- 
ity. He  delivered  an  address  to  the  settlers  in  which  he  "  laid 
some  blame  on  them  for  many  vanities  and  their  idleness,  earn- 
estly wishing  that  he  might  no  more  find  it  so,  lest  he  should  be 
compelled  to  draw  the  sword  of  justice  to  cut  off  such  delinquents, 
which  he  had  much  rather  draw  in  their  defense  to  protect  from 
enemies."  l  The  wretched  state  of  the  colony  is  shown  by  the 
fact  that  the' Governor  transacted  business  on  board  his  ship  as 
there  was  no  house  fit  for  the  purpose.2  A  Council  was  appointed, 
consisting  of  Gates,  Somers,  Percy,  Wenman,  Newport,  and  Stra- 
chey.  The  first  necessity  was  a  supply  of  food,  and  to  obtain  it 
seemed  no  easy  task.  The  Indians  and  the  settlers,  between 
them,  had  consumed  all  the  live  stock  of  every  kind.  Of  six 
hundred  hogs  not  one  remained,  and  even  the  horses  had  all  long 
since  been  eaten.  No  supplies  could  be  looked  for  from  the  sav- 
ages. In  this  strait  Somers  volunteered  his  services.  He  would 
go  with  his  pinnace  to  the  Bermudas  and  bring  back  a  supply  of 
fish  and  flesh  for  six  months,  together  with  some  live  hogs,  which 
abounded  in  the  newly-found  islands.  On  the  9th  of  June  he 
set  sail,  accompanied  by  a  small  vessel,  whose  commander,  Sam- 
uel Argall,  a  young  kinsman  of  Sir  Thomas  Smith,  played  at  a 
later  day  a  leading  part  in  Virginian  history.3 

Meanwhile  Delaware  did  what  he  could  for  the  present  support 
of  the  colony.  The  food  was  carefully  doled  out  in  small  quan- 
tities. Fishing  was  tried  both  in  the  river  and  along  the  coast, 
but  the  result  was  not  enough  to  repay  the  labor  spent.4  In  five 
months  one  hundred  and  fifty  of  the  settlers  died.5     Famine  was 


Hclaware's  letter,  Major,  p.  xxk.  2/^ 

*  Our  authorities  for  Somers's  voyage  and  the  remainder  of  Delaware's  sojourn  are  Dela- 
w^re's  own  letter,  the  True  Declat  ition,  the  Brief  Declaration,  and  Strachey  in  Purchas. 
4  MaJ°r>  P-  xxxi  5  Brief  Declaration. 


THE  COLONY  UNDER  DELAWARE.  I35 

not  the  only  form  of  misery  from  which  the  settlers  suffered. 
J)e_la\vare  had  brought  out  with  him  a  code,  compiled  from  the 
martial  laws  in  force  in  the  Low  Countries.  In  an  amended  form, 
in  force  a  few  years  later,  to  which  I  shali  have  occasion  here- 
after to  refer,  this  code  is  still  extant.  The  severity  of  it  may 
have  been,  and  probably  was,  increased,  but  even  in  their  orig- 
inal form  the  laws  must  have  been  such  that  nothing  but  the  ut- 
ter prostration  of  the  settlers  and  the  commanding  position  and 
character  of  Delaware  could  have  made  them  tolerated.  Strait- 
ened though  he  was  for  resources  of  every  kincl,  Delaware  had 
not  remained  inactive.  Two  small  forts  were  built  in  a  fertile  and 
well- watered  spot  for  the  reception  of  new-comers.  Newport  cap- 
tured an  Indian  chief  with  his  son  and  nephew,  from  whom  Del- 
aware exacted  a  promise  of  five  hundred  bushels  of  corn  in  re- 
turn for  a  quantity  of  copper  beads  and  hatchets.  To  insure  the 
execution  of  the  promise,  the  nephew  was  detained  as  a  hostage. 
For  greater  security  the  young  Indian  was  taken  on  board  ship 
.  with  his  legs  fettered.  Notwithstanding  he  leaped  overboard, 
and,  as  it  was  believed,  escaped  safe  to  the  mainland.  As  might 
have  been  foreseen,  when  the  time  came  round  the  corn  was  not 
forthcoming.  Delaware  determined  to  punish  this  treachery,  and  a 
force  of  some  fifty  picked  men  was  sent  against  the  Paspaheys, 
the  tribesmen  of  the  criminal.  The  Indians  fled  before  the  in- 
vaders. The  English  burned  their  houses,  and  fourteen  of  the 
fugitives,  among  whom  were  the  queen  and  her  children,  fell  into 
the  hands  of  the  English,  and  were  put  to  death.  In  another 
skirmish  at  the  falls  of  the  James  River,  two  or  three  of  the  set- 
tlers were  slain,  among  them  Francis  West,  Lord  Delaware's 
nephew,  and  two  were  taken  prisoners,  a  triumph  which  seems  to 
have  specially  delighted  the  natives.  A  somewhat  ill-timed  ex- 
pedition in  quest  of  gold  and  silver  mines  ended  in  the  slaughter 
of  all  the  miners  by  the  Indians.  These  disasters  seem  to  have 
disinclined  the  settlers  for  further  adventures,  and  for  five  months 
they  remained  quiet,  "  doing  little  but  suffering  much."  1 

The  summer  passed  away  and  the  looked-for  supplies  from  the 
Bermudas  did  not  come.  Shortly  after  sailing,  Argall  had  been 
separated  from  Somers  by  a  fog  and  driven  back  by  stress  of 
weather.  Reaching  the  mainland  north  of  Cape  Cod,  he  coasted 
southwards,  fishing  and  trading  with  the  natives  for  corn.  Com- 
ing farther  to  the  south,  he  sailed  up  the  Potomac.     There  he  not 


Brie/  Declaration. 


i36 


THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 


only  obtained  four  hundred  bushels  of  corn  from  the  king  of  the 
country,  but  recovered  an  English  prisoner,  Henry  Spelman,  the 
sole  survivor  in  the  massacre  of  RatclirTe's  troop  the  year  before. 
Meanwhile  Somers  pushed  on  in  spite  of  contrary  winds,  and  at 
length  reached  the  Bermudas.  But  his  labors  had  been  more  than 
three  score  years  could  bear,  and  in  November  the  brave  old  man 
died  in  the  island  that  he  had  discovered,  toiling  to  the  last  for 
the  colony  which  he  had  done  so  much  to  found.  On  his  death- 
bed he  commanded  his  nephew,  who  was  left  in  command,  to 
return  to  Virginia,  but  his  orders  were  disregarded.  Somers's 
heart  was  buried  in  the  island,  and  his  body  brought  back  to 
England  and  interred  with  military  honors  at  Whitchurch,  in 
Dorsetshire.1 

By  the  end  of  the  year  1610  the  news  of  the  misfortunes  in 
Virginia  had  reached  England.  The  Company  were  utterly  dis- 
state  of  heartened.  The  adventurers  became  remiss  in  paying 
EngTand.  f°r  tneir  shares.2  The  funds  of  the  Company  ran  short 
Gates  and  anc* tne  profits  failed,3  while  Delaware  impressed  upon 
Delaware,  them  the  utter  futility  of  their  present  policy,  and  the 
necessity  for  greater  outlay.  "  Only  let  me  truly  acknowledge," 
he  says  in  a  letter  written  from  Jamestown  a  month  after  his  ar- 
rival, "  they  are  not  a  hundred  or  two  of  depaucht  hands  dropt 
forth  year  after  year,  with  penury  and  pressure,  ill  provided  for, 
before  they  come,  and  worse  governed  when  they  are  here,  men 
of  such  distempered  bodies  and  infected  minds,  whom  no  exam- 
ples daily  before  their. eyes,  either  of  goodness  or  punishment, 
can  deter  from  their  habitual  impieties  or  terrify  from  a  shameful 
death,  that  must  be  carpenters  and  workers  in  this  so  glorious 
building.  But  to  delude  and  mock  the  business  no  longer,  as  a 
necessary  quantity  of  provisions  for  a  year  must  be  carefully  sent 
with  men,  so  likewise  must  there  be  the  same  care  for  men  of 
quality  and  painstaking  men  of  arts  and  practices  chosen  out  and 
sent  into  the  business."4    The  Company,  feeling  probably  the 

1  Travayle  into  Virginia,  p.  39.  See  letters  from  the  Virginia  Company,  and  from  Mat- 
thew Somers,  Sir  George's  nephew.  Virginia  Company,  pp.  55,  57.  Mr.  Neill  has  a  curi- 
ous statement  that  Somers  died  from  a  surfeit  of  wild  hog's  flesh,  English  Colonization,  p. 
50.  In  his  later  work  he  says  that  Somers's  "  frail  body  succumbed  to  the  hardships  he  had 
encountered."  One  would  fain  believe  that  such  a  hero  did  not  perish  by  a  thoroughly  un- 
heroic  death. 

2  Letter  from  Chamberlain  to  Carleton,  Col.  Papers,  161 2,  Aug.  New  Life  0/  Virginia, 
p.  20. 

s  For  the  financial  condition  of  the  company,  see  New  Life,  pp.  11,  20. 
4  Major,  p.  xxxi.     The  very  same  words  are  used  by  Strachey  in  Purchas,  vol.  iv.  p.  1  750; 
a  strong  confirmation  of  Mr.  Major's  view  as  to  the  authorship  of  Delaware's  dispatch. 


SIR  THOMAS  DALE. 


37 


difficulty  in  carrying  out  Delaware's  advice,  seriously  debated  the 
abandonment  of  the  whole  scheme.1  Fortunately  Gates  arrived 
in  England  at  the  end  of  the  year,  and  his  report  was  on  the 
whole  encouraging  to  the  Company.2  He  drew  a  vivid  picture 
of  the  astounding  fertility  of  the  soil.  Wheat  yielded  six  or  seven 
hundredfold,  and  "  beside,  the  natural  pease  of  the  country,  re- 
turns an  increase  innumerable;  and  garden  fruits,  with  roots, 
herbs,  and  flowers,  do  spring  up  speedily;  all  things  committed 
to  the  earth  do  multiply  with  an  incredible  usury."  Moreover, 
the  Frenchmen  brought  over  by  Delaware  gave  promise  of  a 
plentiful  vintage.  Whatever  sickness  there  had  been  was  due  to 
want  of  judgment  in  the  choice  of  a  site.  Finally,  Gates  adjured 
the  Company  not  to  neglect  a  trade  which  would  in  a  great 
measure  make  them  independent  of  foreign  countries.  "  For  our 
commodities  in  the  straights  we  stand  at  the  devotion  of  politique 
Princes  and  States  who  for  their  proper  utility  devise  all  courses 
to  grind  our  merchants,  all  pretences  to  confiscate  their  goods, 
and  to  draw  from  us  all  manner  of  gain  by  their  inquisitive  in- 
ventions ;  when  in  Virginia,  a  few  years'  labor  by  planting  and 
husbandry  will  furnish  all  our  defects  with  honor  and  security." 

Gates's  exhortations  were  not  wasted  on  the  Company,  and 
early  in  the  spring,  three  ships  were  fitted  out  with  three  hundred 
Sir  Thomas  settlers  and  supplies  of  food  for  a  year.  The  command 
Dale.  0f  tke  expedition  was  given  to  Sir  Thomas  Dale,  who 

was  appointed  High  Marshal  of  Virginia.  Of  his  previous  char- 
acter and  exploits  we  know  nothing,  but  his  later  career  proves 
him  to  have  been  a  true  representative  of  that  adventurous  gen- 
eration which  was  just  passing  away ;  energetic,  self-reliant,  self- 
asserting,  without  weaknesses  of  his  own  and  merciless  to  those 
of  others.  Dale's  arrival  in  Virginia  was  fortunately  timed. 
Delaware  had  been  driven  by  ill-health  to  leave  the  colony. 
With  his  commanding  influence  no  longer  over  them,  the  colonists 
had  gone  back  to  their  old  habits  of  sloth  and  improvidence. 
Many  of  them  spent  their  time  playing  bowls  in  the  streets  of 
Jamestown  while  their  houses  were  crumbling  before  their  eyes. 
Content  to  trust  to  the  chance  of  supplies  from  England,,  they 
had  neglected  to  sow  any  corn.3     Dale  at  once  set  to  work  to 

1  Purchas,  vol.  iv.  p.  1758. 

8  The  substance,  if  not  the  actual  words,  of  this  report  are  given  in  the  True  Declaration, 

p.  21. 

3  For  events  about  this  time  we  have  a  fresh  authority  in  Ralph  Hamor,  the  author  of  A 
True  Discourse  of  the  Present  State  of  Virginia,  published  in  1615.     He  was  a  man  of  high 


I38  THE   VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

remedy  these  evils.  Corn  was  sown,  timber  was  felled,  and  the 
houses  repaired.  Active  preparations  were  made  for  settling  a 
new  plantation.  At  the  same  time,  knowing  the  importance  of 
encouraging  those  in  England  by  some  immediate  return,  Dale 
labored  diligently  to  get  his  three  ships  freighted.1  His  letters 
home,  while  they  candidly  admit  the  difficulties  with  which  he 
was  beset,  are  full  of  schemes  for  the  advancement  of  the  colony. 
It  will  be  "  an  enterprise  of  charge,  but  let  him  only  have  two 
thousand  men  and  he  will  settle  five  plantations  up  the  river  and 
overthrow  the  subtle  mischievous  great  Powhatan."  2  Of  the 
ultimate  gains  to  be  looked  for,  and  of  the  resources  of  the 
country,  he  draws  a  glowing  picture.  "  Take  the  four  best  king- 
doms of  Europe,  and  put  them  all  together,  and  they  may  no 
wray  compare  with  this  country  for  commodity  and  goodness  of 
soil." 3  The  only  drawback  to  the  prosperity  of  the  colony  was 
the  abject  character  of  the  settlers.  As  for  those  whom  Dale 
himself  brought  out,  "  they  arcprofane,  and  so  notorious  and  so 
full  of  mutiny  that  not  many  are  Christians  but  in  name."  "  Their 
bodies  are  so  diseased  and  crazed  that  not  sixty  of  them  may  be 
employed  upon  labor."  Yet,  strange  to  say,  he  suggests  that 
England  should  follow  the  example  of  Spain,  and,  as  the  only 
means  of  peopling  the  colony  for  the  next  three  years,  send  over 
all  criminals  condemned  to  death.4 

If  it_was  Dale's  object  to  make  Virginia  a  penal  settlement, 
his  predecessors  had  furnished  him  with  a  system  on  which  it 
The  first  could  be  fitly  governed.  A  code  of  laws,  already  men- 
code!^  '  tioned  as  introduced  by  Gates  or  Delaware,  was  now 
confirmed  and  supplemented  by  Dale.  The  basis  of  this  code 
was  the  military  law  in  force  in  the  Netherlands,  to  which  certain 
additions  were  made  specially  applicable  to  the  wants  of  a  new 
country.  The  code  accordingly  consisted  of  two  portions,  one 
military,  the  other  civil.  Of  the  first  it  is  enough  to  say  that  its 
extreme  and  pedantic  minuteness  must  have  made  it  practically 
a  dead  letter  in  a  rude  and  unsettled  country.     The  civil  code 

standing  in  the  colony  and  in  favor  with  Dale.  The  destitute  state  of  the  colony  is  described 
by  him,  p.  26  m 

1  Dale's  proceedings  are  described  both  by  Hamor  and  in  his  own  letters,  Col.  Papers, 
161 1,  Aug.  17,  1641,  June  3.  Besides  these  there  is  a  third  letter  from  Dale  published  in 
Purchas,  vol.  iv.  p.  1768. 

2  1  >ale  to  Salisbury,  Aug.  17,  1611. 

8  Dule's  letter  to  the  Company,  quoted  in  the  New  Life,  p.  12. 

4  Letters  to  Salisbury. 

•  These  laws  are  published  in  Force,  vol.  iii. 


THE  FIRST  VIRGINIAN  CODE. 


l39 


deserves  more  minute  attention.  It  is  interesting  both  a*,  an 
illustration  of  the  legislative  ideas  of  that  day,  and  also  as  show- 
ing what  manner  of  settlement  some  of  the  most  energetic  found- 
ers of  Virginia  sought  to  establish.  It  is  scarcely  too  much  to 
say,  that  in  the  hands  of  an  unscrupulous  or  wrong-headed  gov- 
ernor it  would  have  given  rise  to  a  system  of  tyranny  little  more 
merciful  than  that  which  had  goaded  the  Netherlands  into  revolt. 
That  conformity  to  the  Church  of  England  should  be  required 
was  in  that  day  but  natural,  and  in  a  newly-settled  community, 
where  none  need  go  but  of  their  own  free  choice,  could  not  be 
regarded  as  a  hardship.  But  even  good  churchmen  might  demur 
to  a  system  which  enforced  attendance  at  daily  worship  by  a 
penalty  of  six  months  in  the  galleys,  and  at  Sunday  service  by  a 
penalty  of  death.  To  blaspheme  the  name  of  God,  to  "  speak 
against  the  known  articles  of  the  Christian  Faith,"  or  "  to  speak 
any  word  or  do  any  act  which  may  tend  to  the  derision  or  de- 
spite of  God's  holy  word,"  were  all  capital  crimes.  The  sanctity 
of  the  clergy  was  guarded  by  a  clause  whose  severity  was  enhanced 
by  its  arbitrary  character.  It  ordained  that  any  man  who  should 
"  unworthily  demean  himself  unto  any  preacher  or  minister  of 
God's  word,"  or  fail  to  "  hold  them  in  all  reverent  regard  and 
dutiful  intreaty,"  should  be  openly  whipped  three  times,  and  after 
each  whipping  should  publicly  acknowledge  his  crime.  Nor 
was  this  the  limit  of  the  respect  shown  to  the  clergy.  They  were 
empowered  to  examine  all  new-comers  in  their  religion,  and  if 
any  one  fell  short  of  the  standard  required,  he  was  to  come  as 
often  as  the  minister  required,  to  be  catechised  and  instructed. 
To  refuse  to  attend  was,  if  persisted  in,  a  capital  crime.  It  is 
consolatory  to  think  that  in  all  likelihood  the  absence  of  clergy 
rendered  this  clause  a  dead  letter.  A  code  which  aimed  at  such 
strictness  in  ecclesiastical  matters  was  not  likely  to  be  more  tol- 
erant on  its  secular  side.  Not  only  was  it  treason  and  punishable 
with  death  to  speak  against  the  king's  majesty,  but  even  to  ca- 
lumniate the  Virginia  Company  or  any  book  published  by  its 
authority.  A  clause,  perhaps  more  atrocious  from  its  vagueness 
%and  even  more  opposed  to  all  rational  ideas  of  legislation,  enacted 
that  "  No  man  shall  give  disgraceful  words  or  commit  any  act  to 
the  disgrace  of  any  person  in  this  colony  or  any  part  thereof, 
upon  pain  of  being  tied  head  and  feet  together  upon  the  ground 
every  night  for  the  space  of  one  month." 

The  code  contained  other  enactments,  needful  indeed  and  well 


I4o  THE  VIRGINIA    COMPANY. 

considered  in  their  objects,  but  enforced  by  utterly  disproportion 
ate  punishments.  The  necessity  of  self-protection  might  justify 
the  punishment  of  death  for  trading  with  the  Indians,  but  there 
could  have  been  no  ground  for  dealing  in  the  same  way  with  the 
comparativaly  venial  offense  of  trafficking  privately  with  the  ships 
which  touched  at  Jamestown.  The  material  prosperity  of  the 
colony  was  guarded  by  an  enactment  which  made  it  a  capital 
crime  to  kill  cattle  or  poultry  without  permission  of  the  Governor, 
or  to  maliciously  root  up  any  crop.  The  general  obligation  of 
diligence  on  the  part  of  workmen,  and  of  due  care  on  the  part  of 
overseers,  was  enforced  by  enactment,  while  the  punishment  was 
left  to  the  discretion  of  a  court-martial.  The  whole  code  is  evi- 
dently a  system  designed  for  the  restraint  of  a  brutal  and  waste- 
ful soldiery,  made  up  in  large  measure  of  adventurers  without 
country  or  fixed  allegiance.  We  can  hardly  suppose  that  those 
who  enforced  this  code  on  the  colony  of  Virginia  intended  it  for 
more  than  a  temporary  expedient  during  a  period  of  license  and 
anarchy.  In  truth  the  colony  at  this  time  scarcely  aimed  higher 
than  at  being  a  profitable  slave-gang  administered  for  the  benefit 
of  the  Company  in  England.  We  may  well  wonder  that  such  a 
community  should  ever  have  cast  off  the  taint  of  its  origin,  and 
have  risen,  mainly  by  its  own  efforts,  into  a  higher  and  better 
life. 

The  question  at  once  suggests  itself,  to  what  extent  was  this 
atrocious  code  actually  enforced  ?  Unhappily,  ample  as  are  the 
records  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Company  in  England,  the 
scanty  accounts  of  the  colony  itself,  after  Smith's  departure,  offer 
no  answer.  Vague  complaints,  indeed,  were  made  at  a  later  day 
of  the  numbers  who  perished  under  the  "  Egyptian  slavery  and 
Scythian  cruelty  "  of  these  laws.1  Unluckily,  the  value  of  this 
testimony  is  somewhat  tainted  by  the  fact  that  it  appears  on  a 
party  manifesto,  whose  object  was  to  make  out  a  case  against  Sir 
Thomas  Smith  and  his  system  of  administration.  It  is,  however, 
probable  that  these  laws  only  applied  to  the  Company's  servants 
and  not  to  those  independent  planters  who  had  settled  at  their 
own  expense,  or  to  the  hired  servants  on  their  estates.  Thus  we 
may  believe  that  this  atrocious  code  had  no  operation  over  those 
who  economically  and  socially  formed  the  most  important  part 
of  the  colony,  and  to  whom  a  large  share  of  self-government  was 
soon  to  be  entrusted. 


In  a  statement  made  by  the  Virginia  Assembly  in  1623.     See  below,  p.  178. 


THE  COLONY  UNDER  DALE.  I4i 

One  of  the  earliest  results  of  the  new  system  was  a  conspiracy- 
headed  by  Jeffreys  Abbot,  a  veteran  soldier,  who  had  seen  service 
state  of  both  in  Ireland  and  the  Low  Countries,  and  was  one 
under  Dafe.  of  the  original  settlers.  The  plot,  however,  was  dis- 
covered and  suppressed,  and  six  of  the  ringleaders  put  to  death.1 
In  August  an  alarm  was  raised  by  a  report,  sent  from  the  fort, 
that  six  ships  had  been  seen  off  the  coast.  So  large  a  fleet  ex- 
cited suspicions,  and  Dale  marshaled  his  forces  to  receive  an  en- 
emy. The  supposed  invaders  proved,  however,  to  be  a  fresh  in- 
stallment of  three  hundred  settlers,  under  the  command  of  Gates 
as  Governor.2  One  of  the  first  steps  taken  by  Gates  was  to 
leave  Percy  in  command  at  Jamestown,  and  to  lead  the  greater 
part  of  the  colony  to  a  more  wholesome  situation.  The  site 
chosen  for  the  new  plantation,  to  be  called  Henrico,  was  in  every 
way  preferable  to  Jamestown.  Placed  in  the  fork  of  a  branch- 
ing river,  it  was  protected  on  two  sides  by  water,  while  on  the 
third  side  it  was  easily  made  strong  enough  to  set  the  Indians  at 
defiance.  Farther  up  another  palisade  was  drawn  across,  between 
the  two  rivers,  some  two  miles  long,  and  guarded  by  several 
forts.  Not  content  with  the  security  given  by  the  river,  Dale 
palisaded  the  town  along  the  bank.  The  houses,  unlike  those  at 
Jamestown,  were  for  the  most  part  built  of  brick,  and  the  town 
included  a  church,  and  a  hospital  for  eighty  patients.  About 
Christmas,  Dale  having  marched  up  the  river  some  five  miles 
from  Henrico,  to  exact  tribute  due  to  the  English  from  the  Apo- 
mattock  Indians,  put  them  to  flight,  and  occupied  their  town. 
He  then  proceeded  to  settle  a  plantation  there,  under  the  name 
of  New  Bermudas.  The  country  to  the  extent  of  nearly  eight 
miles  was  secured  by  a  palisade,  and  before  long  some  fifty  houses 
were  built  within  the  pale.3 

Meanwhile,  the  prospects  of  the  colony  at  home  were  bright- 
ening. As  we  have  seen,  in  the  autumn  of  1611  the  Company 
The  seemed  on  the  very  verge  of  ruin.     Delaware's  return, 

carter.  and  the  good  report  that  he  brought  with  him,  had 
done  something  to  improve  their  prospects.  Still  it  was  clear 
that  without  some  change  the  colony  would  in  all  probability  fall 
to  the  ground.  "  As  for  the  adventurers,  the  greater  part  were 
long  before  beaten  out  as  from  a  hopeless  action." 4     Many  be- 

1  Smith,  p.  no.  2Hamor,  p.  28.  3  New  Life,  p.  14.     Hamor,  p.  32. 

*  Expression  used  in  a  manifesto  published  by  the  Company  in  1624,  entitled  A  Discourse 
of  the  Old  Company  of  Virginia. 


142 


THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 


gan  to  look  with  suspicion  on  Smith's  management,  and  fifteen 
thousand  pounds  of  subscriptions  were  in  arrear.1  The  example 
spread  to  those  below,  and  many  who  had  been  engaged  as  serv- 
ants by  the  Company,  and  had  received  goods  or  money,  either 
hid  themselves  or  openly  refused  to  go  out.2  Under  these  cir- 
cumstances, it  was  decided  that  if  the  Company  was  to  continue, 
it  must  obtain  fresh  powers.  Another  reason  for  desiring  a  new- 
patent  was  found  in  the  fact  that  the  Bermudas,  or,  as  they  were 
called,  after  the  discoverer,  the  Somers  Islands,  which,  it  was  by 
this  time  clear,  would  be  a  valuable  possession,  lay  beyond  the 
limits  fixed  in  the  charter  of  1609.  Accordingly,  in  March,  16 12, 
a  fresh  charter  was  obtained.3  By  this  grant  the  Somers  Islands 
were  added  to  the  Company's  domains.  To  enable  the  Company 
to  carry  on  business  more  readily,  it  was  provided  that  there 
should  be  once  a  week,  or  oftener  if  needful,  a  meeting  held,  at 
which  there  must  be  present  not  less  than  five  of  the  Council 
and  fifteen  of  the  Company.  Besides  this,  there  were  to  be  held 
four  general  courts  in  the  course  of  the  year,  to  elect  a  council 
and  officers,  and  to  legislate  for  the  good  of  the  colony.  Special 
provisions  were  made  for  the  expulsion  of  defaulting  adventurers, 
and  a  clause  was  inserted  enjoining  the  judges,  whether  of  the 
Chancery  or  of  the  Common  Pleas,  to  favor  proceedings  against 
them,  "  as  far  as  law  and  equity  will  in  any  wise  further  and  per- 
mit." The  Company  was  further  empowered  to  deal  summarily 
with  all  servants  of  every  kind  who  shall  fail  to  fulfill  their  con- 
tracts. It  might  apprehend  them,  and  either  bind  them  over  to 
good  behavior,  or,  if  it  preferred,  send  them  to  Virginia  to  be 
dealt  with  as  the  authorities  there  should  think  fit.  Besides  enu- 
merating and  confirming  these  privileges,  the  charter  released  the 
Company  from  all  import  or  export  duties  whatsoever,  and  em- 
powered it  to  increase  its  funds  by  establishing  lotteries. 

About  the  same  time  as  this  alteration  of  the  charter,  the  pros- 
pects of  the  Company  were  materially  bettered  in  another  way. 
capture  of    Hitherto,  ever   since  Smith's    departure,  intermittent 

Pocahon-  .  v  ' 

tas.4  warfare  had  been  waged  between  the  Indians  and  the 

settlers.  This  state  of  things  was  now  ended  by  an  event  which 
at  first  threatened  to  breed  fresh  difficulties.     In  the  spring  of 


»  A  Discourse  of  the  Old  Company  of  Virginia.     Cf.  Chamberlain  to  Carleton.     Col.  Pa- 
pers,  1612,  Aug.  i. 

2  This  is  expressly  stated  in  the  new  charter. 

3  This  new  charter  is  published  in  Stith,  Appendix  III. 

1  The  capture  of  Pocahontas  is  told  by  Argall  himself  in  a  letter  published  in  Purchas,  vol. 
iv.  p.  1764.     It  is  also  related,  together  with  the  subsequent  proceedings,  by  Hamor. 


MARRIAGE  OF  POCAHONTAS.  I43 

1612  Argall  was  sent  to  trade  for  corn  along  the  river  Potomac, 
where,  as  we  have  seen,  he  had  already  had  dealings  with  the 
natives.  In  his  former  visit  he  had  been  especially  friendly  with 
Japazaus,  the  brother  of  the  king  of  that  district.  It  now  came 
to  Argall's  ears  that  Pocahontas,  now  about  seventeen  years  old 
and  married  to  one  of  Powhatan's  captains,  was  with  the  king  of 
Potomac.  Argall  at  once  determined  to  possess  himself  of  her,  as  a 
means  of  ransoming  the  English  prisoners  and  goods  taken  in 
the  previous  year.  With  this  view,  he  went  boldly  to  Japazaus. 
and  told  him  that  unless  he  delivered  up  Pocahontas  to  the  Eng- 
lish, he  must  no  longer  regard  them  as  brothers  or  friends.  This 
threat,  backed  up,  according  to  one  account,  by  the  promise  of  a 
copper  kettle,  proved  too  much  for  the  fidelity  of  Japazaus 
Pocahontas  was  beguiled  on  board  Argall's  vessel,  and  found  her- 
self a  prisoner.  A  message  was  immediately  sent  to  Powhatan, 
to  tell  him  of  the  captivity  of  his  daughter,  and  to  demand,  as 
her  ransom,  the  restitution  of  the  English  prisoners,  with  all  the 
guns  and  tools  taken  from  the  settlers,  and  a  tribute  of  corn. 
Powhatan  sent  back  a  promise  to  fulfill  Argall's  demands.  On 
the  13th  of  April,  Argall  brought  Pocahontas  to  Jamestown,  and 
a  few  days  later,  Powhatan  sent  back  seven  captives  with  three 
muskets,  a  saw,  an  axe,  and  a  canoe  loaded  with  corn.  The 
English,  however,  did  not  consider  that  full  restitution  had  been 
made;  and  detained  their  prisoner  for  a  year.  In  the  spring  of 
161 3,  Dale,  with  a  small  fleet  and  one  hundred  and  fifty  well- 
armed  men,  sailed  up  the  York  river  to  Powhatan's  abode,  taking 
Pocahontas  with  him.  The  king  himself  did  not  appear,  and 
when  the  English  announced  that  their  voyage  was  made  with 
friendly  purpose,  the  Indian  outpost  scoffed  at  them,  and  warned 
them  to  return,  reminding  them  of  the  fate  of  Ratcliffe  and  his 
men.  After  some  hostilities,  in  which  many  of  the  Indian  houses 
were  destroyed  and  their  fields  wasted,  a  truce  was  made.  Mes- 
sengers were  then  sent  to  Powhatan  again  demanding  the  English 
prisoners,  but  they  failed  to  get  a  direct  answer.  Soon  after  two 
sons  of  Powhatan  came  on  board  to  see  their  sister,  and  on  their 
departure  promised  to  use  their  influence  with  their  father  to 
obtain  a  lasting  peace. 

Other  influences  possibly,  besides  those  of  political  expediency, 
were  at  work  to  bring  about  a  union  between  the  two  races.  In 
the  spring  of  161 3,  Pocahontas  was  baptized  by  the  name  of 
Rebecca,  and  married  to  one  of  the  principal  settlers,  John  Rolfe. 


I44  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 

Whether,  as  later  writers  have  supposed,  Rolfe  was  captivated 
by  the  grace  and  beauty  of  the  newly-converted  savage,  and  the 
Her  romantic  interest  attaching  to  her  position,  or  whether, 

marriage.»  as  j^amor  wrote,  he  "  married  one  of  rude  education, 
manners  barbarous,  and  cursed  generation,  merely  for  the  good 
of  the  plantation,"  it  is  impossible  to  say.2  It  is  clear  that  the 
marriage  met  with  the  approval  of  Powhatan.3  The  old  chief 
was  not  destined  to  see  many  more  years,  but  during  his  life,  at 
least,  peace  was  insured,  and  a  precedent  was  established,  which 
might  seem  to  warrant  hopes  of  a  lasting  friendship,  and  possibly 
even  a  final  union  between  the  two  races. 

About  the  same  time,  another  dangerous  enemy  was  conciliated. 
The  Chickahominies  were  among  the  most  warlike  of  the  Indian 
Peace  with  tribes,  and  though  bound  to  Powhatan  by  some  lax  tie 
hominies.*"  of  military  service,  they  were  in  no  way  subject  to  his 
rule,  but  were  governed  by  a  body  of  their  own  elders.  The 
union  of  Powhatan  with  the  English  not  unnaturally  alarmed  the 
Chickahominies.  They  immediately  sent  an  embassy  to  Dale, 
offering  to  give  up  their  name,  and  adopt  that  of  Tasautessus 
or  Englishmen,  and  to  be  subject  to  Dale,  as  the  deputy  of  the 
king  of  England,  though  retaining  their  own  form  of  government. 
Dale  on  receiving  this  message  straightway  sent  off  Argall  and 
forty  men  to  the  village  of  the  Chickahominies.  The  next  day 
at  a  solemn  council  the  alliance  was  concluded.  The  conditions 
were :  that  the  Chickahominies  should  be  called  Englishmen,  and 
be  subject  to  King  James;  that  they  should  neither  kill  nor  de- 
tain the  English  nor  any  of  their  cattle,  but  should  restore  any 
that  fell  into  their  hands;  that  they  should  always  be  ready  to 
furnish  the  English  with  three  hundred  men  against  any  enemy, 
and  that  they  should  give  a  yearly  tribute  of  two  bushels  of  corn 
for  every  one  of  their  warriors,  receiving  in  return  hatchets,  cop- 
per, and  scarlet  cloth.  The  eight  chief  elders  made  themselves 
responsible  for  the  execution  of  all  these  conditions,  and  were  to 
receive  a  red  coat,  a  copper  chain,  and  King  James's  picture. 
to  be  called  his  noblemen. 

In  the  following  year  Dale  made  an  attempt  to  secure  a  fur-j 

1  It  is  scarcely  needful  to  quote  authorities  for  a  matter  of  common  notoriety  like  the  mai- 
riage  of  Rolfe  and  Pocahontas.     The  details  are  told  by  Hamor.     It  is  remarkable,  as  Mr.  \ 
Neill  notices,  that  no  writer  says  anything  of  the  place  or  the  officiating  minister. 

8  Dale  in  Purchas,  vol.  iv.  p.  1769.     Hamor,  p.  24. 

8  Hamor,  p.  11. 

*  16.,  p.  13.     Smith,  p.  114. 


FRENCH  SETTLEMENTS. 


H5 


ther  hold  over  Powhatan.  Ralph  Hamor,  one  of  the  most  in- 
Hamor's  fluential  and  educated  among  the  colonists,  to  whom 
Powhatan."  our  knowledge  of  these  proceedings  is  chiefly  due,  was 
sent  to  the  Indian  king  to  ask  for  another  of  his  daughters. 
Powhatan,  upon  the  arrival  of  the  stranger,  demanded  a  chain 
of  pearls,  which  had  been  agreed  on  as  a  token  for  all  messengers 
from  Dale.  When  Hamor  told  him  that  this  was  only  intended 
to  apply  to  those  who  were  sent  suddenly  without  an  authorized 
guide,  the  king  seemed  satisfied  with  the  explanation  and»received 
Hamor  in  his  house  with  every  sign  of  friendship.  After  inquir- 
ing for  his  daughter  he  sought  to  know  Hamor's  business,  and, 
upon  being  told  that  it  was  private,  he  commanded  all  save  two 
of  his  wives  to  withdraw.  After  assuring  the  king  of  Dale's 
friendship,  in  token  of  which  he  had  brought  him  a  worthy  pres- 
ent, two  large  pieces  of  copper,  five  strings  of  white  and  blue 
beads,  five  wooden  combs,  ten  fish-hooks,  and  a  pair  of  knives, 
Hamor  proceeded  to  the  object  of  his  embassy.  Powhatan,  after 
thanking  Hamor  for  the  friendly  message  and  present,  told  him 
that  the  maiden  had  been  sold  a  few  days  before  for  two  bushels 
of  roanoke.  Hamor,  whose  ideas  of  the  sanctity  of  marriage 
and  of  commercial  morality  seem  to  have  been  about  equally  lax, 
proposed  that  Powhatan  should  return  the  roanoke  and  reclaim 
his  daughter,  paying  the  defrauded  husband  goods  to  three  times 
the  amount.  Powhatan  then  declared  that  his  true  reason  was 
that  he  could  not  bear  to  part  with  another  child.  At  the  same 
time  he  assured  Hamor  of  his  hearty  friendship  for  the  English, 
and  dismissed  him  with  a  supply  of  food  for  Rolfe  and  his  wife, 
as  well  as  for  Hamor  himself. 

While  the  government  of  Virginia  had  been  thus  establishing 
friendly  relations  with  the  savages,  it  narrowly  escaped  being 
The  French  embroiled  with  its  civilized  neighbors.  In  the  spring 
colonies.  0f  jgj^  Gates  sailed  to  England,  leaving  Dale  in  com- 
mand of  the  colony.2  To  understand  the  most  important  events 
which  occurred  during  his  term  of  office,  we  must  take  a  retro- 
spective view  of  the  steps  hitherto  taken  by  France  towards  col- 
onizing North  America.  Even  before  the  beginning  of  the  cent- 
ury she  had  made  more  than  one  effort  to  follow  up  the  enter- 
prise of  Cartier  and  to  settle  the  continent  west  of  Newfoundland. 
In  1598  an  attempt  was  made  by  a  Breton  noble,  the  Marquis  de 

1  Hamor,  p.  37.  *  Smith,  p.  115. 

IO 


146 


THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 


la  Roche.1  He  was  invested  with  all  the  rights  of  a  feudal  lord 
De  la  over  a  vast  territory.     Practically  all  that  he  did  was 

?e°ttihem8ent.2to  establish  a  colony  swept  together  from  the  gaols 
and  to  leave  them  to  collect  furs.  He  himself  died  before  he 
could  come  to  their  rescue ;  for  four  years  they  were  left  in  the 
wilderness,  and  when  discovered  by  a  band  of  their  own  coun- 
trymen who  had  come  to  seek  for  furs,  there  were  but  twelve 
alive. 

In  1604  a  more  successful  attempt  was  made.  The  leader  of 
the  expedition  was  Samuel  Champlain,  a  sea  captain  from  Brit- 
champiain  tany,  who,  in  his  eagerness  to  learn  the  secrets  of  the 
Montses  New  World,  had  obtained  command  of  a  Spanish  ship 
and  had  made  a  voyage  to  the  West  Indies.  He  found  a  sup- 
porter in  the  Sieur  de  Monts,  a  gentleman  of  the  king's  chamber. 
De  Monts  obtained  from  his  master  a  patent  of  settlement  for  a 
region  to  be  called  Acadia,  extending  from  forty  to  forty^-six^dej 
grees  of  north  latitude.4  Like  his  predecessor  De  la  Roche,  he 
acted  on  what  might  almost  be  called  the  first  principle  of  col- 
onization in  that  age,  and  obtained  leave  to  ransack  the  prisons. 
Besides  the  criminals,  the  colony  had  within  it  another  element 
of  discord.  De  Monts  himself  was  a  Calvinist,  and  was  accom- 
panied by  ministers  of  his  own  faith.  But  one  of  the  conditions 
on  which  his  patent  was  granted  compelled  him  to  carry  out  Ro- 
manist missionaries.  Accordingly  the  outward  voyage  was  en- 
livened by  theological  controversies,  often  ended  by  the  great 
theological  argument  of  that  age,  an  appeal  to  force.  The 
priests,  however,  do  not  seem  to  have  been  urged  by  any  ardent 
missionary  zeal ;  and  when  a  second  voyage  sailed  to  recruit  the 
colony,  not  one  of  their  order  could  be  persuaded  to  accompany 
it.  The  colony  was  unfortunate  in  its  first  site.  The  spot  chosen 
was  on  the  river  St.  Croix,  the  southern  boundary  of  the  cold 
though  fertile  territory  of  New  Brunswick.  Winter  brought  with 
it  the  horrors  of  scurvy,  and  about*  half  the  settlers  died.  A 
change  was  then  made,  and  the  colony  was  removed  to  the  spa- 
cious basin  known  in  later  days  as  the  harbor  of  Annapolis,  but 

1  Parkman,  p.  210.     Lescarbot,  i.,  422. 

2  Here,  as  before,  I  rely  largely  on  Mr.  Parkman.     Lescarbot  now  becomes  an  auth 
of  the  first  order,  as  he  himself  took  part  in  the  principal  attempt  at  settlement. 

3  Champlain's  character  and  antecedents  are  well  described  by  Mr.  Parkman,  p.  215.  7  neie 
is  also  an  interesting  account  of  Champlain,  with  extracts  from  his  writings,  in  the  intn 
tion  to  his  Voyage  to  the  West  Indies,  published  by  the  Hakluyt  Society. 

4  For  De  Mont's  voyage,  see  Champlain,  Voyages  de  la  Nouvelle  France,  ed.  1632,  | 
ch.  viii.,  and  Parkman,  p.  221,  etc. 


DE  MONTS  AND  POUTRINCOURT. 


147 


then  called  Port  Royal.  There,  despite  of  hardships  and  religious 
disputes,  the  settlement  prospered.  For  the  first  time  there  was 
to  be  seen  in  America  a  colony  of  Europeans,  not  a  mere  band 
of  adventurers  or  explorers,  but  a  settled  community  subsisting 
by  their  own  labor.  Their  relations  with  the  Indians  were  friendly, 
while  at  the  same  time  the  settlers  showed  no  inclination  either  to 
relax  their  precautions  or  to  depend  on  their  savage  neighbors 
for  supplies. 

The  jealousy  of  the  French  traders  and  the  supineness  of  the 
French  government  overthrew  this  hopeful  condition  of  things. 
De  Poutrin-  The  merchants  of  the  Breton  and  Norman  ports  looked 
court.*  wjtjj  jealousy  on  the  fur  monopoly  granted  to  De  Monts, 
and  by  the  use  of  corrupt  influence  at  court  obtained  its  with- 
drawal. Without  that  monopoly  De  Monts  could  hardly  carry 
on  the  settlement,  and  it  seemed  as  if  the  country  must  be  aban- 
doned. There  was,  however,  at  least  one  among  the  followers 
of  De  Monts  who  was  not  to  be  lightly  discouraged.  The  Baron 
of  Poutrincourt  had  taken  a  leading  part  in  the  settlement  of 
Port  Royal,  and  he  now  set  to  work  to  rebuild  the  shattered 
fabric.  He  soon  found  himself  linked  with  associates  with  whom 
he  had  little  in  common.  The  year  1610  is  memorable  in  the  an- 
nals of  North  America  as  marking  the  introduction  of  a  new  and 
mighty  power  in  colonial  life.  Already  had  the  Society  of  Jesus 
shown  an  unequaled  capacity  for  exerting  influence  over  widely 
dissimilar  races  and  in  distant  climes.  The  Jesuits  were  equally 
at  home  in  the  market  place  and  in  the  desert ;  they  were  to  be 
found  alike  in  the  crowded  cities  of  the  Mogul  Empire  and  the 
pathless  wilds  of  Paraguay.  But  among  them  all,  there  were 
none  who  deserved  better  of  the  order  and  of  mankind  than 
those  heroes  who  planted  the  cross  on  the  heights  of  Hochelaga 
and  on  the  farthest  shores  of  Lake  Superior.  The  manner  of 
their  first  introduction  to  America  was  characteristic  alike  of  the 
order  and  of  the  age.  The  licentiousness  of  French  court  life 
was  often  strangely  broken  by  enthusiastic  though  short-lived  out- 
bursts of  devotion.  Religion  was  now  for  a  while  the  fashion, 
and  the  profligate  queen  was  the  zealous  patroness  of  the  Jesuits. 
With  her  were  associated  in  a  strange  alliance  the  royal  mistress, 
the  Marchioness  of  Verneuil,  and  that  Madame  de  Guercheville 
whose  unsubmissive  charms  had  fascinated  and  baffled  the  passion 
of  the  king.     Such  was  the  patronage  to  which  the  first  Canadian 


ot  the 

7 


outrincourt's  settlement  is  told  by  Mr.  Parkman,  ch.  v. 


I48  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

missions  owed  their  origin.  Poutrincourt,  though  a  Catholic,  was 
no  bigot,  and  abhorred  the  prospect  of  such  associates.  It  was, 
however,  useless  to  strive  against  court  influence.  Even  if  the 
king  had  lived,  it  is  unlikely  that  that  kindly  and  sagacious  profli- 
gate would  have  thwarted  the  wife  whom  he  despised  and  the 
mistress  whom  he  loved.  As  it  was,  the  dagger  of  Ravaillac  de- 
prived Poutrincourt  of  any  hope  from  that  quarter.  Much  as  he 
disliked  the  prospect,  it  was  better  to  accept  the  restoration  of 
the  colony,  even  with  a  Jesuit  mission  tacked  on  to  it,  than  allow 
France  to  lose  her  only  hold  on  the  New  World. 

As  might  have  been  expected,  these  ill-matched  yokefellows 
soon  fell  out.  Poutrincourt  himself  was  arrested  for  debt,  at  the 
The  Jesuit  sint>  li  *s  sa^)  °f  tne  Jesuit  body  in  France,  but  his  in- 
destruciiorf terests  m  tne  c°l°nv  found  a  manful  supporter  in  his 
byArgaii.»  son  Biencourt.2  In  1 6 13  .the  Jesuits  and  their  friends 
in  France  determined  to  establish  another  colony.  It  is  not  un- 
likely that  they  dreaded  the  influence  of  Poutrincourt  and  his 
son  at  Port  Royal,  and  wished  to  found  a  colony  in  which  their 
authority  should  be  sole  and  undisputed.  Accordingly  a  ship 
was  sent  out  with  forty-eight  men,  abundantly  stocked  with  all 
the  materials  for  a  colony.  One  Saussaye,  a  man  of  high  rank, 
was  in  command.  Two  Jesuits  were  on  board,  and  two  more 
joined  the  ship  when  it  touched  at  Port  Royal.  After  meeting 
with  a  heavy  storm,  the  party  landed  where  a  long  chain  of 
picturesque  islands  dots  the  coast  of  Maine.  The  process  of 
colonization  was  speedily  interrupted.  Early  in  the  summer 
Argall  had  sailed  from  Jamestown  in  a  vessel  with  fourteen  can- 
non and  sixty  men  to  fish  along  the  coast  of  Maine.3  From 
•some  Indians  with  whom  he  fell  in,  he  learned  the  surprising  news 
that  a  French  settlement  had  established  itself  within  the  limits 
assigned  by  King  James  to  the  Virginia  Company.  If  it  be  true 
that  his  suspicions  of  French  emigrants  were  first  excited  by  the 
polite  gestures  of  the  savages,  it  is  certainly  a  remarkable  proof 

1  Mr.-  Parkman  has  derived  his  account  of  the  Jesuit  colony  from  Lescarbot,  and  from  a 
t  recently  published  collection  of  papers  taken  from  the  Jesuit  archives  at  Rome,  and  consisi- 
1  ing  of  letters  from  the  founder  of  the  colony.  The  most  important  of  these  is  a  report  from 
,Brand. 

2  Parkman,  p.  271. 

8  Our  knowledge  of  Argall's  attack  on  the  Jesuits  is  derived  partly  from  his  own  statements, 
partly  from  Brand's  report  Argall's  account  is  given  in  his  own  letter  (see  p.  189).  Neither 
Argall  nor  Brand  can  be  looked  on  as  thoroughly  trustworthy,  but,  luckily,  they  correct  one 
another.  We  have  also  a  dispatch  from  the  French  admiral,  De  Montmorency,  setting  forth 
the  grievances  of  the  Jesuits  and  demanding  redress.  This  is  published  in  the  Col.  Papers, 
Oct,  1613.     It  confirms  the  account  given  in  the  text. 


ARGALL  ATTACKS  THE  FRENCH  SETTLEMENT. 


149 


of  that  influence  over  inferior  races  which  the  French  have  ever 
possessed  in  a  pre-eminent  degree.  Without  any  announcement 
of  hostility,  or  anything  in  the  nature  of  a  declaration  of  war, 
Argall  bore  down  on  the  peaceful  settlement  with  drums  beating, 
and  with  a  fire  of  musketry  and  cannon.  The  French  were  out- 
numbered, and  utterly  defenseless.  They  themselves  were  on 
shore,  the  ordnance  on  board  their  vessel.  What  resistance  was 
made  was  due  to  the  men  of  the  gown,  not  the  men  of  the  sword. 
Saussaye  fled,  and  left  his  followers  to  their  fate.  One  of  the 
Jesuits  bravely  rushed  on  board  the  ship,  and  discharged  a  can- 
non, but  with  no  effect.  ArgalFs  men  returned  the  fire ;  the  gal- 
lant priest  fell,  and  the  rest  were  soon  overpowered.  Saussaye's 
cowardice  soon  met  with  its  deserved  punishment.  The  unscru- 
pulous Argall  took  possession  of  his  effects,  discovered  his  com- 
mission, and  removed  it,  leaving  everything  else  as  he  had  found 
it.  Next  day  Saussaye  slunk  out  of  his  hiding-place,  and  Argall, 
with  well-acted  courtesy,  demanded  his  commission.  When 
Saussaye  looked  in  vain  for  it,  Argall  denounced  him  as  a  pirate, 
and,  placing  him  in  an  open  boat,  sent  him  off  to  sea,  with  four- 
teen of  his  followers.  By  a  strange  piece  of  good  fortune,  they 
fell  in  with  two  fishing  vessels  from  their  own  country,  and  were 
brought  safely  to  St.  Malo.  The  rest  of  the  prisoners  were  car- 
ried off  to  Jamestown.  A  Governor  who  dealt  with  his  subjects 
after  the  manner  of  Sir  Thomas  Dale,  was  not  likely  to  be  lenient 
to  foreigners,  who  must  have  seemed  little  better  than  pirates. 
Argall,  however,  had  honesty  enough  to  interfere,  and  to  confess 
his  own  duplicity  in  time  to  save  the  lives  of  his  victims. 

But  though  Dale  spared  the  lives  of  his  prisoners,  he  had  no 
idea  of  suffering  what  he  regarded  as  a  French  encroachment. 
Attack  on  Three  vessels  were  at  once  fitted  out,  including  the 
Royai.i  French  prize,  and  it  speaks  ill  for  Dale's  principles  that 
he  condoned  Argall's  perfidy,  and  again  entrusted  him  with  the 
command.  If  the  general  belief  of  the  French  may  be  trusted, 
the  enmity  of  the  English  against  Port  Royal  was  quickened  by 
the  Jesuit  prisoners.  On  arriving  thither,  the  English  found  the 
place  empty ;  and  after  killing  and  carrying  off  the  live  stock, 
and  plundering  and  burning  the  fort,  they  went  in  quest  of  the 
absent  settlers,  whom  they  found  reaping  near  the  fort.  Then, 
as  Biencourt  afterwards  alleged,  the  Jesuit  Brand  crowned  his 

1  Argall's  second  expedition  is  told  in  Brandt  report  and  in  Lescarbot.  The  latter  pub- 
lished Poutrincourt's  own  statement. 


I5o  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 

treachery  by  soliciting  the  men  to  leave  their  captain's  service, 
and  to  join  the  English;  but  his  overtures  were  scornfully  rejected. 
Biencourt  himself  was  soon  afterwards  discovered,  and  had  an 
interview  with  Argall.  Nothing  came  of  this,  and  Argall  sailed 
away  with  his  prisoners,  who,  after  more  than  one  adventure, 
reached  England.  Lesser  outrages  have  involved  nations  in  war; 
but  France  was  in  no  condition  to  avenge  the  wrongs  of  her  col- 
onists, and,  after  a  complaint  from  the  French  ambassador,  the 
matter  dropped.  Biencourt  rebuilt  Port  Royal,  and  Acadia  in 
after  years  grew  into  a  prosperous  colony,  memorable  for  the  pas- 
toral happiness  of  its  inhabitants,  and  for  the  shameful  tragedy 
by  which  that  happiness  was  destroyed.  But  no  attempt  was 
made  to  renew  the  settlement  by  the  Penobscot,  and  the  main- 
land north  of  Cape  Cod  knew  no  European  inhabitant  till  it  was 
peopled  by,  religious  enthusiasts  who  united  the  zeal  and  ardor 
of  the  Jesuits  with  the  practical  sense  and  vigor  of  those  Virgin- 
ian adventurers  who  overthrew  them. 

Argall's  exploits  were  not  the  only  events  which  made  the  year 
1 6 14  memorable  in  the  annals  of  the  Virginia  Company.  In  that 
Discussion  year,  for  the  first  time,  a  colonial  question  came  under 

about  Vir-       .  _  .. 

giniain       the  notice  01  Parliament.      I  he  matter  itself  was  tnv- 

Parlia- 

ment.i  ial,  and  the  immediate  result  equally  so.  Yet  no  event 
can  be  regarded  as  wholly  unimportant  which  served  to  define 
the  relations  of  Parliament  towards  the  colonies,  especially  at  the 
outset  of  the  great  contest  between  parliamentary  and  kingly  au- 
thority. On  the  20th  of  April,  Middleton,  himself  one  of  the 
Virginia  Company,  made  a  speech  in  the  House  of  Commons 
which  seemed  likely  to  prejudice  the  interests  of  the  colony.  He 
denounced  the  importation  of  tobacco  as  leading  to  dissoluteness 
and  extravagance.  The  Company,  probably  in  consequence,  pre- 
sented a  petition  to  the  House,  and  obtained  leave  to  be  heard 
by  counsel.  On  the  17th  of  May  a  number  of  the  members  ap- 
peared, with  Richard  Martin  as  their  advocate.  On  this  occa- 
sion he  seems  to  have  been  more  anxious  to  display  his  own  elo- 
quence than  to  advance  the  cause  of  his  clients.  He  summed 
up  all  the  advantages  which  the  country  might  derive  from  colo- 
nization, supporting  his  views  by  all  those  arguments  which  the 
pamphlets  of  the  day  have  made  familiar  to  us.  Spain,  Holland, 
and  Portugal,  he  reminded  his  hearers,  had  their  West  and  East 
India  possessions.    Was  England  to  be  behind  them  in  energy  and 


>  This  debate,  with  Martin's  speech,  is  recorded  in  the  Journals  of  the  House  of  Commons. 


THE  COLONY  UNDER  DALE.  151 

enterprise  ?  All  that  Virginia  wanted  to  make  it  prosperous  was 
population  of  the  right  kind,  honest  workmen  with  their  wives 
and  families.  To  neglect  the  interest  of  the  young  colony  was 
to  imitate  the  thriftless  parsimony  which  had  led  Henry  VII.  to 
slight  the  promises  of  Columbus,  and  would  be  punished  with 
like  loss.  Such  cases,  he  told  the  House,  really  concerned  them 
more  than  the  trifles  on  which  so  much  of  their  time  was  wasted. 
We  can  hardly  wonder  that  the  House  took  fire  at  such  a  speech, 
and  demurred  to  being  lectured  as  by  a  schoolmaster  teaching 
his  scholars.  It  was  at  once  moved  that  the  members  of  the 
Virginia  Company  who  held  seats  in  the  House  should  withdraw, 
while  the  conduct  of  their  advocate  was  taken  into  consideration. 
Next  day  Martin  was  brought  to  the  bar  of  the  House,  where, 
after  receiving  a  solemn  rebuke  from  the  Speaker,  he  knelt  down 
and  confessed  his  wrong-doing,  only  pleading  in  his  extenuation 
that  he  "had  digressed  from  his  subject,  and  was  like  a  ship  that 
cutteth  the  cable  and  putteth  to  sea,  for  he  cut  his  memory,  and 
trusted  to  his  invention."  There  the  matter  ended ;  but  it  can 
hardly  have  failed  to  prejudice  the  House,  and  may  have  served 
to  deprive  the  Company  of  an  ally  in  its  coming  hour  of  danger. 
The  departure  of  Gates  had  left  Dale  in  command  of  the  col- 
ony. From  that  time  till  his  departure,  Dale  was  in  reality  the 
The  colony  autocratic  ruler  of  Virginia.  Under  his  vigorous  tyr- 
Daie.i  anny  the  economical  state  of  the  colony  had  confess- 

edly been  bettered.  The  Indians  had  been  completely  kept  in 
check  and  the  English  territory  made  permanently  defensible.  By 
his  treaties  with  the  natives  and  his  enforcement  of  the  cultivation 
of  corn,  the  colony  was  so  well  supplied  that  it  could  even  afford 
to  sell  to  the  Indians.2  Dale  might  fairly  boast  on  his  return  that 
he  had  "  left  the  colony  in  great  prosperity  and  peace." 3  So 
much  had  the  value  of  land  risen  and  the  necessity  for  tempting 
emigrants  diminished,  that  shares  were  reduced  from  a  hundred  to 
fifty  acres.4  Private  industry  was  so  far  allowed  that  every  man  had 
three  acres  of  land  allotted  to  him  which  he  could  cultivate  in 
the  spare  time  allowed  from  the  public  works.     Even  with  this 

1  The  authorities  for  the  condition  of  the  colony  under  Dale's  government  are :  I.  The 
-  Brief  Declaration,  in  which  all  the  hardships  are  forcibly  set  forth.     2.   The  Tragical  Rela- 

tian,  (see  below,  p.  178),  which  adopts  the  same  tone.  The  more  favorable  side  of  the  ques- 
tion is  given  in  Smith,  Hamor,  and  not  least  in  Dale's  own  letters. 

2  Suth,  p.  140.     I  do  not  know  on  what  authority   Stith  relies,  but,  considering  his  general 
accuracy  and  the  nature  of  his  information,  I  am  inclined  to  trust  him. 

3  Dale  to  Winwood,  Col.  Papers,  June  3,  1   16. 

4  Stith,  p.  139. 


Lc2  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY, 

modified  form  of  private  property  the  colony,  it  is  said,  throve 
better  than  under  the  old  system  of  joint  labor.1  But,  though  the 
settlement  was  more  prosperous,  it  seems  doubtful  whether  the 
colonists  were  much  happier  than  in  the  days  of  RatclirTe  and 
Percy.  The  state  of  Virginia  under  the  government  of  Gates 
and  Dale  is  fully  described  in  reports  drawn  up  a  few  years  later 
and  signed  by  men  of  the  highest  position  in  the  colony.  These 
accounts  may  be  exaggerated  by  party  feeling ;  but,  even  after 
all  such  deductions,  they  present  a  picture  of  misery  scarcely 
equaled  by  anything,  even  in  the  struggles  of  the  colony  during 
its  infancy.  A  merciless  code  was  mercilessly  administered. 
Some  men  in  their  despair  fled  to  the  savages  for  refuge,  and 
were  brought  back  and  cruelly  tortured.  Sir  Thomas  Smith's  at- 
tention was  devoted  to  the  East  India  Company,  and  his  duties 
as  Treasurer  were  neglected.  The  supplies  sent  out  to  the  col- 
ony were  contracted  for,  and  the  contractors  furnished  food  unfit 
for  hogs.  Most  of  the  colonists  were  still  detained  in  personal 
servitude.  Those,  indeed,  at  Dale's  favorite  settlement,  Bermu- 
das Hundred,  were  allowed  to  work  for  themselves  on  condition 
of  bringing  three  barrels  of  corn  and  giving  one  month's  labor 
to  the  Company.  The  rest  of  the  colonists  were  given  one 
month  to  work  for  themselves,  in  consideration  of  which  privilege 
their  supply  of  corn  from  the  public  store  was  reduced  to  two 
bushels.  It  would  scarcely  seem  an  exaggeration  to  say  that  but 
for  the  independent  settlers  the  colony  under  Dale's  government 
was  an  orderly  and  profitable  slave-gang. 

In  1616  Dale  finally  left  the  colony,  taking  with  him  Ro4fe, 
his  wife,  and  several  of  her  countryfolk.  Neither  Dale  himself 
Departure  nor  Pocahontas  ever  revisited  Virginia.  Dale  had  al- 
Pocahon-  ready  won  fame  in  Europe  and  America,  and  his  ener- 
deaths.  gies  were  now  transferred  to  Asia.  In  16 17  we  find 
him  commanding  a  vessel  in  the  East  Indies.  After  some  fierce 
encounters  with  Dutch  and  Portuguese'  ships,  he  died,  after  three 
weeks'  sickness,  at  the  English  factory  at  Masulipatam.2  The  ro- 
mantic story  of  Pocahontas's  capture  and  marriage  had  preceded 
her  visit  to  England.  Virginia  was  by  this  time  a  popular  topic, 
both  with  preachers  and  pamphleteers,  and  the  plays  of  the  day 
contain  more  than  one  reference  to  it,  both  from  a  sarcastic  and 

1  Hamor,  p.  17. 

»  Dale's  later  career  and  death  are  told  by  Mr.  Sainsbury  in  the  preface  to  his  second  vol- 
ume of  East  India  Papers. 


rOCAHONTAS  IN  ENGLAND. 


J53 


picturesque  point  of  view.  A  savage  was  no  longer  a  novelty. 
But  such  a  savage  as  Pocahontas,  not  a  chief  with  bones  in 
his  cheeks,  but  a  princess  who  was  married  to  an  Englishman, 
wore  a  hat  and  ruff  and  wielded  a  fan  like  a  civilized  fine  lady, 
might  well  figure  in  the  town  letters  and  court  gossip  of  the  day. 
The  picture  of  the  Indian  princess  was  one  of  the  curios- 
ities which  Londoners  promised  to  their  friends  in  the  coun- 
try,1 and  the  lady  herself  was  presented  to  the  king  and  ap- 
peared with  her  savage  attendants  at  a  court  jnask.2  Poca- 
hontas, however,  like  Wanchese,  pined  under  an  English  sky, 
and  in  March,  1617,  after  all  arrangements  had  been  made 
for  her  departure,  she  died  at  Gravesend.3  One  child,  a  son, 
survived  her,  and  figures  as  an  ancestor  of  more  than  one  old 
Virginian  family. 

Of  the  Indians  who  accompanied  Pocahontas  we  find  scat- 
tered notices  in  the  records  of  the  times.  One  of  them,  Tomo- 
Pocahon-     como,  a  man  of  importance  and  a  son-in-law  of  Pow- 

tas's  com-     .  _  ...„,.,,  , 

panions.  hatan,  figures  prominently  in  Smith  s  somewhat  un- 
trustworthy work.  According  to  that  account  he  was  instructed 
by  Powhatan  to  observe  the  resources  and  population  of  Eng- 
land, especially  the  crops  and  trees,  since  the  eagerness  of  the 
English  to  obtain  corn  and  timber  had  begotten  the  suspicion 
that  their  own  land  produced  neither.4  If  we  are  to  believe 
Smith,  Tomocomo  was  greatly  disappointed  with  the  English 
king,  and  contrasted  his  niggardly  treatment  of  strangers  with 
the  liberality  of  his  own  master.  The  only  other  authentic  rec- 
ord of  Tomocomo  seems  to  be  that  Purchas  often  saw  him  at  the 
house  of  a  certain  Dr.  Gulstone,  where  he  would  sing  and  "dance 
his  diabolical  measures." 5  Of  the  maids  who  came  over  with 
Pocahontas,  one  became  a  servant  to  a  mercer  in  Cheapside, 
and  the  records  of  the  Company  show  an  entry  of  twenty  shil- 
lings expended  in  procuring  physic  and  cordials  for  her  when 
"  very  weak  of  consumption."  6  Two  others,  after  apparently  put- 
ting the  Company  to  considerable  trouble,  were  sent  out  to  the 

1  Pocahontas's  picture,  drawn  and  engraved  by  De  Passe,  is  reproduced  by  Mi\  Neill, 
Virginia  Company ,  p.  98. 

*  Chamberlain  to  Carleton,  Col.  Papers,  Jan..  18,  1617.  Stith  has  a  story  to  the  effect  that 
James  looked  with  jealousy  on  Rolfe's  royal  marriage.  One  would  be  sorry,  by  believing 
the  story,  to  rob  the  court  wits  of  the  credit  of  so  happy  an  invention. 

8  The  register  of  her  death  is  published  by  Mr.  Neill,  Virginia  Company,  p.  98. 
4  Stith,  p.  144;  Smith,  p.  123. 

*  Purchas,  vol.  iv.,  p.  177. 

6  Virginia  Company,  p,  103. 


I54  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

Somers  Islands,  and  were  there  married,  it  may  be  presumed,  to 
Englishmen.1  The  fate  of  the  party  generally  does  not  seem  to 
have  been  a  happy  one,  as  it  impressed  on  Sir  Edward  Sandys 
the  lesson  that  to  bring  the  Indians  to  England  to  be  taught 
"might  be  far  from  the  Christian  work  intended."2 

At  Dale's  departure  he  left  Yeardley  with  the  office  of  Deputy- 
Governor.  A  change  in  the  condition  of  the  settlement  was  at 
Yeardley  hand.  Virginia,  after  the  departure  of  Dale,  had  to  go 
Governor,  through  that  most  critical  period,  a  season  of  relaxa- 
tion, of  change*  from  a  severe  to  a  lenient  government.  A  few 
years  later,  as  we  shall  see,  in  the  hands  of  a  Governor  fully  as 
despotic  as  Dale,  but  without  a  particle  of  his  public  spirit,  the 
settlement  sank  into  a  state  of  utter  misery.  Part  of  this  was  in 
all  probability  due  to  Yeardley.  If,  as  is  alleged,  he  set  at  defi- 
ance the  law  enacted  by  Dale  that  the  cultivation  of  corn  should 
take  precedence  of  that  of  tobacco,  and  encouraged  the  latter  form 
of  industry  to  the  neglect  of  all  others,  he  was  guilty  of  sanctioning 
an  error  whose  evil  effects  was  felt  for  generations  later.3  Yet  it 
is  impossible  not  to  look  with  some  respect  on  one  who  succeeded 
in  governing,  as  it  would  seem,  without  severity  and  without  dis- 
order, men  who  for  six  years  past  had  been  treated  little  better 
than  slaves,  one  of  whom  his  subjects  could  say  that  they  lived 
under  him  "  in  all  peace  and  the  best  plenty  that  they  ever  yet 
had."  *  In  that  part  of  his  policy  of  which  we  have  the  fullest 
account,  his  dealings  with  the  Indians,  Yeardley  seems  to  have 
shown  a  greater  mixture  of  vigor  and  moderation  than  any  Gov- 
ernor since  Smith.  Before  long,  owing,  it  is  said,  to  the  excess- 
ive attention  to  tobacco  culture,  corn  began  to  run  short.  An 
application  to  the  Chickahominies  for  the  supply  they  had  prom- 
ised was  met  with  a  contemptuous  refusal.  The  savages  proba- 
bly thought  that  the  power  of  the  English  was  wielded  by  weaker 
hands,  and  they  tauntingly  told  Yeardley  that  he  was  but  Dale's 
man,  and,  though  they  paid  his  master,  he  was  not  to  look  for 
the  same  obedience.  After  many  idle  threats  had  passed  on  each 
side,  Yeardley  commanded  his  men  to  fire  upon  the  Indians. 
Twelve  fell  and  twelve  more  were  captured.  Their  countrymen 
were  glad  to  ransom  the  prisoners  with  a  large  supply  of  corn, 
besides  buying  peace  bf  the  payment  of  the  supply  originally 
agreed  upon.     The  firmness  shown  by  the  settlers  had  a  good 

1  Virginia  Company,  p.  104.  2  jD if  p_  ,05< 

1  Smith,  p.  120.  4  xhe  Brief  Declaration. 


ARGALL  DEPUTY-GO VERNOR. 

effect  on  the  neighboring  tribes.  The  settlers  could  leave  their 
houses  unguarded  without  fear  of  loss.  The  savages  habitually- 
traded  with  them,  and  acted  as  their  guides  in  hunting.  It  al- 
most seemed  as  if  the  two  nations  had  become  one.1  The  prin- 
cipal grievance  of  the  settlers,  their  state  of  servitude,  was  abated 
under  Yeardley,  though  not  entirely  removed.  The  settlers  at 
Bermudas  Hundred,  whose  condition  was,  as  we  have  already  seen, 
exceptionally  favorable,  were  liberated.  The  rest  of  the  settlers  re- 
mained for  the  most  part  in  their  former  servitude.2 

In  1617  a  party  of  greedy  and  unprincipled  adventurers, 
headed  by  Lord  Rich,  soon  after  the  Earl  of  Warwick,  acquired 
Argaii  ap-  sufficient  influence  in  the  Company  to  nominate  a  creat- 
SJeputy-  ure  °f  tnen"  own  as  Deputy-Governor.3  Their  choice 
Governor.  0f  Argall  would  in  itself  have  tainted  their  policy  with 
suspicion.  Whether  dealing  with  the  Indians,  the  French,  or  the 
Dutch,  he  had  shown  himself  able,  resolute,  and  unscrupulous. 
To  do  him  justice,  he  seems  at  least-  to  have  understood  the  prin- 
ciple of  Tiberius  that  a  shepherd  should  shear  his  sheep,  not  flay 
them.  His  first  measure  was  to  provide  a  sufficient  supply  of 
corn  for  the  maintenance  of  the  colony.4  With  that  he  appeared 
to  think  that  his  duty  to  the  settlers  was  at  an  end.  In  addition 
to  his  authority  as  Deputy-Governor,  ample  enough  it  might  be 
supposed  under  the  existing  code,  Argall  had  been  furnished 
through  the  agency  of  Rich  with  a  commission  as  Admiral  of 
the  colony  and  the  seas  adjoining.5  By  virtue  of  these  powers 
he  issued  a  succession  of  arbitrary  edicts.  Of  these  some,  as 
might  have  been  expected  from  his  character,  were  reasonable 
and  politic.  He  forbade  all  traffic  with  the  savages  and  all  waste 
of  ammunition,  and  made  it  a  capital  crime  to  teach  an  Indian  v* 
gunnery.  Attendance  at  divine  worship  was  strictly  enforced,  and 
all  communication  between  the  settlers  and  the  crews  of  ships  trad- 
ing to  the  colony  was  forbidden.6  This  measure  was  probably  in- 
tended to  prevent  any  complaints  of  the  settlers  against  Argall  from 
reaching  England.  An  event  soon  occurred  which  released  Ar- 
gall from  the  fear  of  a  superior,  and  probably  emboldened  him  in 
his  evil  courses.  Lord  Delaware,  who  had  sailed  in  a  large"  ves- 
sel with  two  hundred  emigrants,  fell  ill  while  touching  at  the 
Spanish  colony  of  St.  Michael's,  and  died  under  circumstances 

1  For  Yeardley's  dealings  with  the  Indians,  see  Smith,  p.  121,  and  the  Brief  Declaration. 
*  Brief  Declaration.  3  Stith,  p.  145.  *  Smith,  p.   124. 

8  Stith,  p.  145.  e  I6mt  p-  I47. 


i56 


THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 


which  raised  a  suspicion  that  he  had  been  poisoned  by  his  hosts.1 
About  thirty  of  his  companions  died  too,  and  the  rest  arrived,  so 
sickly  and  ill-provided  for,  as  to  add  considerable  to  the  troubles 
of  the  colony. 

Argall_  now  began  to  show  that  his  care  for  the  well-being  of 
the  colony  was  no  better  than  the  charity  of  the  cannibal  who 
feeds  up  his  prisoner  before  making  a  meal  on  him.  Trade  with 
the  Indians  was  withheld  from  individuals,  but,  instead  of  being 
turned  to  the  benefit  of  the  Company,  it  was  appropriated  by 
Argall.  The  planters  were  treated  as  a  slave-gang  working  for 
the  Deputy's  own  private  profit.  The  Company's  cattle  were 
sold,  and  the  proceeds  never  accounted  for.2 

During  this  time  a  great  change  had  come  over  the  Company 
at  home.  An  energetic  and  public-spirited  party  had  been  formed, 
Formation  opposed  alike  to  Sir  Thomas  Smith  and  to  Lord  Rich, 
party  in  Their  leader  was  Sir  Edwin  Sandys,  a  member  of  that 
pany.°m"  country  party  wrnch  was  just  beginning  to  take  its 
stand  against  the  corruptions  of  the  court  policy.  Side  by  side 
with  him  stood  one  whose  name  has  gained  a  wider  though  not 
a  more  honorable  repute,  the  follower  of  Essex,  the  idol  of 
Shakespeare,  the  brilliant,  versatile  Southampton.  One  of  the 
first  symptoms  of  a  change  of  temper  in  the  Company  was  a  let- 
ter to  Argall  charging  him  with  various  acts  of  dishonesty.  This 
letter  was  accompanied  by  one  to  Lord  Delaware,  requesting  him 
to  send  Argall  home  to  England  and  to  seize  his  goods  as  secu- 
rity. Owing  to  Delaware's  death  these  instructions  came  direct 
into  Argall's  possession.  The  only  effect  apparently  was  to  make 
him  feel  that  his  time  was  short,  and  that  he  must  make  the  most 
of  it.  He  at  once  took  off  the  laborers  who  were  busy  on  Del- 
aware's plantations,  and  set  them  to  work  for  his  own  profit.3  It 
is  somewhat  hard  to  understand  how  such  tyranny  as  Argall's 
came  to  be  endured  by  the  mass  of  the  colonists.  No  doubt  the 
constitution  of  the  colony  gave  great  opportunity  to  a  bold,  able 
and  unscrupulous  ruler;  yet  it  seems  strange  that  Argall  should 
have  found  men  not  merely  to  tolerate,  but  to  help,  though  per- 
haps reluctantly,  at  his  misdeeds.  The  case  is  just  one  of  those 
which  illustrates  the  inadequacy  of  merely  formal  and  official 
documents  to  explain   the  undercurrents  of  personal  character 

1  For  Delaware's  death,  see  Neill's  Hist.,  p.  97.  • 

2  These  misdeeds  of  Argall's  are  fully  set  forth  in  two  letters:  one  from  the  Virginia  Com- 
pany to  himself,  Virginia  Company,  p.  114  ;  the  other  to  Delaware,  p.  117. 

3  Stith,  p.  151. 


ARGALL  SUPERSEDED.  i57 

and  feeling  which  so  largely  determine  events.  Of  official  doc- 
uments we  have  plenty.  Two  or  three  private  letters,  showing 
the  real  state  of  opinion  in  the  colony,  would  do  more  to  clear 
up  matters  and  to  enable  us  to  understand  the  true  extent  of 
Argall's  misgovernment  and  the  cause  of  his  temporary  success. 
At  length  one  crowning  act  of  misconduct  brought  matters  to  a 
crisis.  A  certain  Captain  Edward  Brewster,  who  had  taken  a 
leading  part  in  the  colony  in  the  days  of  Newport,  ventured  to 
interfere  with  one  of  the  men  whose  labor  Argall  was  wrongfully 
appropriating.  For  this  Brewster  was  arrested,  tried  by  a  court- 
martial,  and,  under  the  bloody  code  still  in  force,  sentenced  to 
death.  At  length,  persuaded  by  the  clergy  and  some  of  the  more 
influential  settlers,  Argall  substituted  a  sentence  of  banishment, 
but  not  till  a  promise  had  been  extracted  from  Brewster  that  he 
would  never,  in  England  or  elsewhere,  do  or  say  anything  to  the 
dishonor  or  disparagement  of  Argall,  and  that  he  would  never  re- 
turn to  Virginia.  Brewster,  however,  considering  that  this  prom- 
ise had  been  exacted  from  him  under  duress,  brought  the  matter 
before  the  Council.1  About  the  same  time  another  piece  *of 
misconduct  on  the  part  of  the  Deputy  became  known  in  Eng- 
land. Lord  Rich  sent  out  a  ship  to  the  colony.  How  far  he  himself 
intended  her  for  the  service  to  which  she  was  afterwards  applied 
seems  uncertain.  Argall,  true  to  his  old  buccaneering  instincts, 
victualed  her,  manned  her  with  a  picked  crew,  and  then  sent  her 
with  an  old  commission  from  the  Duke  of  Savoy  to  ravage  on 
the  Spanish  Main.2 

The  next  year,  1619,  was  remarkable  in  the  annals  of  the  col- 
ony. It  is  hardly  an  exaggeration  to  say  that  it  witnessed  the 
Argall  creation  of  Virginia  as  an  independent  community. 
bUPYeard-d  From  tne  beginning  of  that  year  we  may  date  the  defi- 
ley-  nite  ascendency  of  Sandys  and  his  party,  an  ascend- 

ency which  was  maintained  till  the  dissolution  of  the  Company, 
and  during  which  the  affairs  of  Virginia  were  administered  with 
a  degree  of  energy,  unselfishness  and  statesmanlike  wisdom,  per- 
haps unparalleled  in  the  history  of  corporations.  One  of  the 
first  measures  was  to  send  out  Yeardley  to  supersede  Argall.  To 
this  appointment  the  king  apparently  gave  his  sanction  by  knight- 
ing the -new  Governor  before  his  departure.3  Argall's  good  fort- 
une and  resolution  stood  by  him  to  the  last.     His  patron,  War- 

»  Stith,  p.  152.  »  lb.  p.  153. 

8  Letter  from  Chamberlain,  Colonial  Papers,  1618. 


I58  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

wick,  sent  him  warning  of  what  was  in  store,  and,  if  rumor  be 
true,  created  a  diversion  in  his  favor  by  delaying  Yeardley's  ves- 
sel.1 Accordingly  when  Yeardley  arrived  he  found  that  Argall  had 
escaped.  No  further  attempt  seems  to  have  been  made  to  bring 
him  to  justice.  In  the  next  year  he  was  commanding  a  ship 
against  the  Algerines,  and  he  appears  once  again,  five  years  later, 
as  Sir  Samuel  Argall,  an  unsuccessful  candidate  for  the  Governor- 
ship of  Virginia.2 

In  April  the  condition  of  the  Company  underwent  an  impor- 
tant change.  Warwick  and  his  followers,  indignant,  it  is  said,  with 
Sir  Thomas  ^  Thomas  Smith  for  not  supporting  Argall,  united 
superseded  w*tn  tne  Partv  °f  Sandys  to  elect  a  new  Treasurer, 
by  sandys.3  Smith  himself  tendered  his  resignation,  pleading  age, 
sickness,  and  his  official  responsibilities  towards  the  East  India 
Company.  It  would  seem,  however,  as  if  he  had  not  intended 
to  be  taken  at  his  word,  or  as  if  he  had  wished  to  'be  suc- 
ceeded by  the  Deputy-Treasurer,  Alderman  Johnson,  who  was 
one  of  his  own  supporters.  At  all  events,  he  appears  to  have 
been  mortified  by  the  election  of  Sandys  as  Treasurer,  with  John 
Ferrar,  a  London  merchant  and  seemingly  one  of  Sandys's  party, 
as  Deputy-Treasurer.  Smith's  wounded  feelings  were  soothed  by 
a  grant  of  two  thousand  acres  of  land  from  the  Company.  As 
far  as  one  can  understand  these  somewhat  obscure  and  compli- 
cated affairs,  the  party  of  Warwick  had  now,  to  gratify  their 
temporary  spleen  against  Smith,  placed  a  man  in  office  who  was 
likely  to  be  in  the  long  run  far  more  obnoxious  to  them. 

About  the  same  time  that  these  things  were  doing  in  England, 
a  step  of  the  greatest  importance  was  being  taken  in  Virginia. 
The  first  Yeardley,  in  obedience  to  instructions  from  the  Com- 
Assembiy.  pany,4  summoned  an  Assembly  of  Burgesses  from  "the 
various  hundreds  and  plantations.  At  one  step  Virginia,  from 
being  little  better  than  a  penal  settlement,  ruled  by  martial  law, 
became  invested  with  important,  though  not  full,  rights  of  self- 
government.  Though  we  have  no  direct  evidence  of  the  fact, 
there  is  every  probability  that  during  the  administrations  of 
Yeardley  and  Argall  the  number  of  independent  planters  possess- 
ing estates  of  their  own,  with  laborers  employed  in  the  service 
of  their  masters,  not  of  the  Company,  had,  increased.  Unless 
such  an  influence  had  been  at  work,  it  is  scarcely  possible  that 

1  Stith,  p.  157. 

2  For  Argall's  after  career,  see  Neill's  History,  p.  66. 

.  s  Virginia  Company,  p.  143.  *  lb.,  v    1  ™. 


THE  FIRS  T  A  SSEMBL  Y.  L -g 

the  experiment  of  constitutional  government  should  have  suc- 
ceeded, or  even  have  been  tried. 

On  the  30th  of  July,  161 9,  the  first  Assembly  met  in  the  little 
church  at  Jamestown.  A  full  report  of  its  proceedings  still  exists 
its  compo-  in  tne  English  Record  Office.1  Every  freeman  ap- 
sition.  pears  to  have  had  a  vote,  and  each  county  and  hun- 
dred returned  two  members.  Besides  these  were  certain  private 
plantations  which  possessed  the  right  of  returning  members.  On 
what  principle  these  plantations  were  chosen  does  not  appear ; 
the  simplest  and  most  probable  view  is  that  they  had  most  inhab- 
itants. At  first  this  might  seem  like  giving  the  owner  the  right 
of  nominating  two  members.  Practically  we  may  be  pretty  sure 
that  his  influence,  though  always  powerful,  would  be  modified  by 
certain  indefinite,  but  nevertheless  real,  checks.  At  the  outset  a 
difficulty  arose  which  is  not  without  interest,  as  indicating  a 
danger  to  which  not  only  Virginia,  but  our  other  American  colo- 
nies were  exposed.  Two  plantations,  Warde's  and  Martin's, 
had  returned  members,  though  their  proprietors  had  not  formally 
acknowledged  the  authority  of  the  Company.  Warde  seems  to 
have  been  either  an  independent  squatter  or  else  a  tenant  of 
Martin.  In  Warde's  case  the  question  was  easily  decided,  and 
in  consideration  of  his  expense  in  settling,  he  was  allowed  to  take 
his  seat  as  the  representative  of  his  plantation  with  an  under- 
standing that  he  should  get  a  proper  commission  from  the  Com- 
pany. Martin's  case  was  more  complicated.  Not  only  did  he 
occupy  land  of  his  own,  but  his  patent  contained  a  special  clause 
exempting  him  from  the  legislative  authority  of  the  Company. 
It  clearly  seemed  unreasonable  that  he  should  have  a  share  in 
making  laws  whose  authority  he  might  at  any  time  disclaim.  He 
seems,  too,  to  have  prejudiced  his  case  by  certain  acts  of  un- 
authorized hostility  against  the  Indians.  As  he  was  unwilling  to 
accept  the  offer  of  the  Assembly  and  to  relinquish  the  objection- 
able clause,  no  arrangement  could  be  made.  We  find  traces  of 
the  existence  of  other  isolated  plantations  like  these.  But  in 
Virginia,  as  in  the  Northern  coloniiSJrthese  soon  attached  them- 
selves to  the  community,  and  in  that  process  we  see  an  instance 
of  the  principle  of  cohesion  which  throughout  regulated  the 
growth  of  the  English  colonies. 

The  principal  functions  of  the  Assembly  were:   1.  To  cast  the 

1  Colonial  Papers,  July  30,  1619. 


x6o  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

various  instructions  sent  out  by  the  Company  into  the  form  of 
its  ro-  law-  2-  To  supplement  these  with  laws  of  their  own. 
ceedings.  3  To  petition  the  Council  of  the  Company  on  certain 
points.  The  first  of  these  tasks  resulted  in  several  orders  which 
contrast  singularly  with  the  complex  and  merciless  code  admin- 
istered by  Dale.  The  present  laws  did  not  aim  at  being  a  com- 
plete code.  They  evidently  assumed  that  the  colonists  were  to 
live  under  the  common  law  of  England,  and  merely  supplement 
it  with  such  regulations  as  were  applicable  to  the  peculiar  wants 
of  the  colony.  The  new  laws  strictly  forbade  any  injury  to  the 
Indians  as  likely  to  endanger  the  peace  and  revive  old  quarrels. 
In  one  point  they  deviated  from  the  instructions  sent  out.  The 
Council  in  England  suggested  that  efforts  should  be  made  to 
draw  in  the  Indians,  to  establish  friendly  relations,  and  to  make 
converts.  The  Assembly  expressed  the  opinion  that  all  such  ad- 
vances ought  to  come  from  the  natives  themselves.  In  short, 
the  policy  of  the  settlers,  less  ambitious  than  that  of  the  Com- 
pany, but  more  practical  and  more  prudent,  was  to  have  as  little 
intercourse  as  possible  with  the  Indians,  and  to  observe  a  strict 
neutrality,  trading  with  them  when  necessary,  but  treating  them 
neither  as  foes  nor  friends. 

In  other  matters  the  new  laws,  though  more  lenient  and  mod- 
erate than  the  old  code,  showed  the  same  tendency  to  regulate 
private  life  and  to  limit  individual  enterprise.  The  Company 
was  to  monopolize  the  trade  in  tobacco  and  sassafras.  Every 
head  of  a  household  was  to  grow  a  certain  quantity  of  corn. 
"  Tradesmen  "  might  be  constrained  to  work  in  their  own  de- 
partment. A  confirmed  idler  was  to  be  placed  by  the  Governor 
under  a  master.  Gaming  and  drunkenness  were  forbidden,  but 
not  with  any  very  severe  penalties.  Moderation  in  dress  was  en- 
forced by  the  rational  system  of  taxing  a  man  according  to  his  own 
or  his  wife's  apparel.  The  protective  spirit,  as  some  have  called 
it,  shown  in  these  laws  may  seem  to  us  excessive,  but  it  was  only 
in  accordance  with  the  views  of  that  age.  And  certainly  if  such 
legislation  can  be  justified  anywhere,  it  is  in  the  case  of  a  young 
community  where  the  welfare  of  all  may  be  endangered  by  the  idle- 
ness and  extravagance  of  a  few,  and  where  those  social  and  moral 
restraints  are  but  feebly  felt  which  in  old-established  societies  sup- 
plement the  force  of  law  and  to  a  great  extent  render  it  needless. 

The  above  regulations  were  all  derived  from  the  instructions 
sent  out  by  the  Company.     The  ordinances  which  the  Assembly 


FUR  THER  PROCEEDINGS  OF  A  SSEMBL  Y.  1 6 1 

itself  added  were  few  and  unimportant.  It  forbade  all  servants 
and  persons  not  furnished  with  licenses  to  trade  with  the  Indians, 
and  made  it  penal  to  sell  them  horses,  dogs,  or  arms,  the  first 
and  second  under  a  fine  of  five  pounds,  the  last  under  pain  of 
death.  Other  regulations  were  added,  evidently  also  intended 
to  insure  the  peace  with  the  Indians.  Any  person  absent  from 
his  home  for  seven  days,  or  found  twenty  miles  from  it  at  any 
time,  was  to  be  fined  twenty  shillings,  and  any  one  "  resorting  to 
the  Indians "  forty  shillings.  The  clergy  were  empowered  to 
warn  any  persons  guilty  of  incontinence,  "or  any  other  enormous 
sin";  and  if  after  two  warnings  the  offenders  remained  incorrigi- 
ble, to  excommunicate  them.  In  that  case  the  Governor  was  to 
apprehend  the  guilty  person  and  detain  his  goods.  What  the 
ultimate  penalty  was  does  not  clearly  appear.  The  difficulty  of 
obtaining  free  labor,  a  difficulty  caused  no  doubt  by  the  abun- 
dance of  land  and  destined  to  shape  the  whole  future  of  Virginia, 
is  shown  by  an  enactment,  ordering  that  any  servant  who  should 
engage  himself  to  two  masters  should  be  compelled  as  far  as 
might  be  to  serve  them  both.  Another  special  feature  of  Vir- 
ginia, scarcely  less  serious  in  its  consequences,  was  foreshadowed 
in  Yeardley's  address,  in  which  he  warned  the  planters  not  to 
establish  themselves  so  far  one  from  another. 

The  petitions  drawn  up  by  the  Assembly  and  addressed  to  the 
Company  are  not  the  least  interesting  portion  of  their  proceed- 
ings. The  first  had  reference  to  the  tenure  of  lands,  and  was  not 
improbably  connected  with  Argall's  extortions  and  misdeeds.  It 
asked  the  Company  to  specify  clearly  what  powers  of  granting 
lands  previous  Governors  had  enjoyed,  and  expressed  a  hope  that 
no  one  might  be  injured  in  his  landed  estate,  in  a  tone  which  im- 
plies the  presence  of  such  a  danger.  So,  too,  the  third  petition 
requests  that  the  old  planters  and  those  who  came  out  at  their 
own  expense  before  the  time  of  Dale,  may  be  fairly  dealt  with  in 
the  distribution  of  lands,  and  a  due  share  apportioned  to  their 
children  and  wives,  "  because  that  in  a  new  plantation  it  is  not 
known  whether  men  or  women  be  more  necessary."  Further- 
more, the  Assembly  petitioned  for  more  settlers  to  fill  up  four 
plantations  alreaay  marked  off  and  incorporated,  and  also  for 
workmen  to  build  a  college. 

The  Assembly  did  not  confine  itself  to  deliberation  and  legisla- 
tion. It  evidently  regarded  itself  as  having  the  powers  of  a  civil 
and  criminal  law  court.     Argall  had  exacted  from  certain  planters 

ii 


j 62  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY 

a  sum  of  six  hundred  pounds  as  quit  rent  due  to  himself,  and  fifty- 
pounds  to  one  Powell  for  clearing  the  ground.  The  Assembly- 
decided  that  the  exaction  of  the  six  hundred  pounds  was  illegal, 
and  that  the  fifty  pounds  must  be  paid  by  Argall.  It  also  took 
into  consideration  the  case  of  Henry  Spelman,  who  had  been  for 
some  time  prisoner  among  the  Indians.  His  influence  among 
them  necessarily  made  him  a  person  of  considerable  importance. 
He  was  charged  with  having  spoken  disrespectfully  of  Yeardley 
to  Opechancanough,  saying  that  "  a  great  man  should  come  and 
put  him  out  of  his  place."  For  this  he  was  tried!  and  apparently 
sentenced  to  death.  His  punishment,  however,  was  commuted 
to  degradation  from  his  rank,  and  by  a  singular  arrangement  he 
was  compelled  to  serve  as  interpreter  for  seven  years.  Finally,  the 
Assembly  enforced  a  poll-tax  in  tobacco  for  the  payment  of  sal- 
aries to  the  Speaker,  Clerk,  Sergeant,  and  Provost- Marshal,  and 
then  dissolved  owing  to  the  heat,  earlier,  it  would  seem,  than 
members  wished. 

In  England  the  Company  under  its  new  government  set  to 
work  with  an  energy  before  unknown,  to  it,  to  improve  the  con- 
increased  dition  of  the  colony.  A  committee  was  appointed  to 
th|rpart  of  codify  the  existing  ordinances  of  the  Company,  and 
pany.°m"  also  to  frame  a  code  for  Virginia.1  The  latter  design 
came  to  nothing,  and  the  colonists  were  left  to  work  out  their 
political  and  legislative  system,  guided  by  their  own  wants  and 
the  experience  of  the  mother  country.  More  immediate  and 
practical  measures  were  taken  for  bettering  the  state  of  the  col- 
ony. To  check  the  over-production  of  tobacco  a  clause  was  in- 
serted in  all  fresh  patents  of  land,  binding  the  holder  to  cultivate 
a  certain  quantity  of  other  commodities.2  Everything  was  done 
to  encourage  permanent  settlers  rather  than  mere  traders.  Ap- 
prentices, unmarried  women,  and  neat  cattle  were  sent  out.3 
New  forms  of  industry,  too,  were  set  on  foot,  such  as  timber  yards, 
silk  manufactories,  iron  foundries,  and  vineyards.4 

In  another  way,  too,  the  new  spirit  which  animated  the  Com- 
pany began  to  be  felt.  In  nearly  all  of  the  early  pamphlets  and 
speeches  advocating  American  colonization,  the  conversion  of 
the  natives  had  been  put  prominently  forward.      Hitherto  the 

1  Virginia  Company,  p.  176.  Stith,  p.  162.  The  Ordinances  in  the  codified  form  are 
republished  in  Force,  vol.  iii. 

2  Ordinances  in  Force,  p.  21. 

3  Virginia  Company,  p.  158. 

4  lb.  174,  239,  241.     A  Declaration,  p.  21.     Discourse  of  the  Old  Company. 


MISSIONA R  Y  SCHEMES.  1 63 

Virginia  Company  had  done  but  little  to  fulfill  these  anticipa- 
tions. In  1618  the  Company  began  to  show  signs  of  carrying  out 
Schemes  tms  Part  0I"  tne^r  original  design.  Land  was  allotted  for 
fng  CtheVert"  a  missi°nary  college,  and  by  royal  license  a  general 
savages.  collection  was  made  throughout  the  realm  to  Obtain 
funds.  Nothing  further  seems  to  have  been  done  until  after  the 
election  of  Sandys.  On  the  26th  of  May,  161 9,  we  find  him  lay- 
ing before  the  Company  a  statement  of  the  results  of  the  collec- 
tion, and  a  scheme  for  building  and  endowing  a  college.1  The 
labors  of  the  Company  in  this  quarter  were  aided  by  a  bequest 
of  three  hundred  pounds  from  Nicholas  Ferrar,  a  London  mer- 
chant and  a  leading  member  of  the  Company,  lately  deceased,2 
and  by  a  donation  of  about  six  hundred  pounds,  together  with 
some  books,  from  an  unknown  benefactor,  who  adopted  the  sig- 
nature of  "  Dust  and  Ashes."  The  persistent  modesty  of  this 
nameless  friend  was  somewhat  inconvenient  to  the  Company,  as 
it  deprived  them  of  the  opportunity  of  consulting  him  as  to  the 
employment  of  his  gift.3  The  Company  was  further  strengthened 
by  the  accession  of  Patrick  Copland,  the  first  great  missionary 
whom  the  English  Church  had  produced  since  the  Reformation. 
In  1614  he  had  brought  over  a  young  Bengalee  convert,  who 
was  baptized  two  years  later  by  the  strange  name  of  Petrus  Papa.4 
The  services  of  Dale  and  Gates  towards  each  corporation  had 
already  established  some  connection  between  the  Virginia  Com- 
pany and  its  elder  sister,  the  East  India  Company,  and  it  is  not 
impossible  that  this  relation,  perhaps  even  the  direct  influence  of 
one  or  other  of  those  two  eminent  men,  may  have  led  Copland 
to  extend  his  sympathies  to  the  younger  body.  In  1619,  on  his 
return  from  the  East  Indies,  he  collected  from  his  fellow-voyagers 
a  sum  to  be  devoted  to  the  conversion  of  the  Virginian  natives  ; 5 
and,  though  he  never  actually  visited  the  colony,  yet  from  that 
time  he  was  a  zealous  and  steadfast  friend  to  the  missionary  ef- 
forts of  the  Company. 

Besides  these  charitable  aids  the  Company  adopted  other 
means  for  raising  the  needful  funds.  Iron -works  were  established 
in  the  colony  at  the  Company's  expense,  of  which  the  proceeds 
were  to  be  applied  to  teaching  the  Indian  children  Christianity. 
Unluckily  Captain  Bluett,  the  manager  of  these  works,  died  soon 

1  Virginia  Company,  p.  146. 

2  lb.,  p.  182.     This  Nicholas  Ferrar  was  an  uncle  of  his  more   famous  namesake. 
8  Neill,  pp.  117,  133.     Stith,  p.  171.  *  Neill,  p.  107. 

•  Virginia  Company,  p.  222. 


x64  THE  VIRGINIA   COM r A  NY. 

after  his  arrival  in  the  colony,  and  the  scheme  fell  to  the  ground.1 
Other  difficulties  beset  the  Company  in  these  benevolent  labors. 
Those  who  planned  missionary  schools  in  Virginia  can  have  had 
little  idea  of  the  wild,  untamable  nature  of  the  Red  Indian  and 
of  his  loathing  for  the  restraints  of  civilization.  As  long  as  the 
woods  held  game  and  the  waters  fish,  there  was  little  chance  of 
the  savage  allowing  his  children  to  undergo  what  he  regarded  as 
the  debasement  of  industry.  The  colonists,  too,  could  not  be  in- 
duced to  lend  a  helping  hand.  The  Company  suggested  that 
Southampton  Hundred  and  Martin's  Hundred  should  jointly  un- 
dertake the  task  of  training  the  Indian  children.  Martin's  Hun- 
dred pleaded  its  weakness  and  confusion,  and  when  the  Company 
proposed  to  transfer  the  whole  task  to  Southampton  Hundred, 
the  inhabitants  offered  to  pay  a  hundred  pounds  to  be  relieved 
from  the  duty.2 

The  failure  of  its  missionary  efforts  was  not  the  only  discour- 
agement which  beset  the  Company.  The  new  party  had  estab- 
Divisions  lished  its  ascendency,  but  in  doing  so  it  had  made  for 
Company.*  itself  enemies  both  within  the  Company  and  without. 
The  necessary  investigation  into  Sir  Thomas  Smith's  account  re- 
vealed utter  carelessness  or  worse  on  his  part.4  In  self-defense 
or  revenge  he  allied  himself  with  Warwick  and  Argall,  and 
headed  a  party  of  malcontents,  too  few  openly  to  influence  the 
proceedings  of  the  Company,  but  powerful  enough  to  under- 
mine its  prosperity  and  finally  to  effect  its  ruin.5  This  party 
found  a  convenient  tool  in  the  Secretary  to  the  Governor  and 
Council,  John  Pory.  He  seems  to  have  been  a  clever,  needy, 
profligate  adventurer,  one  of  those  vagrant  men  of  letters  who 
w^re  as  common  a  product  of  that  age  as  the  professional  sharper 
or  bully.6  He  had  obtained  his  appointment  by  the  influence  of 
Warwick,  and  repaid  the  debt  by  betraying  to  him  all  the  in- 

1  Neill,  pp.  136,  137.  *Ib.  p.  135. 

8  The  history  of  the  dispute  on  which  we  are  entering  is  somewhat  confused  and  obscure. 
Our  knowledge  of  it  is  chiefly  derived  from  the  archives  of  the  Company  as  reproduced  by 
Stith  and  Mr.  Neill.  We  have  also  various  documents  among  the  State  Papers.  The 
Life  of  Nicholas  Ferrar  is  a  valuable  authority  for  all  the  transactions  in  which  he  was  con- 
cerned. The  author,  Dr.  Peckard,  Master  of  Magdalen  College,  Cambridge,  was  a  collateral 
descendant  of  Ferrar,  and  had  access  to  family  documents.  This  book  is  published  in 
Wordsworth's  Ecclesiastical  Biographies,  vol.  iv. ;  it  is  to  this  that  my  references  apply. 

4  Ferrar,  Stith,  pp.  158,  186.  Cf.  A  letter  from  Robert  Cushman,  a  Puritan,  and  after- 
wards one  of  the  Plymouth  Colonists,  quoted  by  Mr.  Neill,  Virginia  Company,  p.  143. 

•  The  alliance  between  Smith  and  Warwick  appears  incidentally  in  various  transactions. 
C£  Stith,  p.  1 72. 

6  T  .otters  quoted  in  Virginia  Company. 


OPPOSITION  FROM  THE  COURT. 


I65 


tended  proceedings  against  Argall.1  The  detection  of  this  cor- 
respondence by  Yeardley  brought  down  upon  him  the  wrath  of 
Warwick,  to  the  injury  of  Yeardley 's  influence  among  the  settlers, 
and  even,  it  is  said,  among  the  Indians.2 

To  these  dangers  were  united  others  from  without  still  more 
serious.  Several  of  the  leading  members  among  the  new  party 
Court  in  the  Company  were  already  obnoxious  to  the  court, 

opposition.  Sandys,  Digges,  Selden,  and  Sir  Nathaniel  Rich,  were 
at  once  members  of  the  Virginia  Company  and  of  the  country 
party  in  Parliament.  Southampton  was  a  close  ally  of  Essex, 
whose  temper  and  family  history  marked  him  out  as  a  patriot 
leader.  Spain,  as  we  shall  hereafter  see,  was  doing  her  utmost 
to  embroil  the  Company  with  the  king,  and  her  ambassador, 
Gondomar,  had  already  taught  James  that  "  a  seditious  Company 
was  but  the  seminary  to  a  seditious  Parliament." 3 

The  first  symptom  of  opposition  from  the  coart  was  upon  the 
election  of  a  successor  to  Sandys.  His  term  of  office  expired  in 
Election  of  May,  1620.  The  general  wish  of  the  Company  was 
tonkas3"115"  t0  ?l^ct  Southampton  as  his  successor.  A  message 
Treasurer.*  came  from  court  mentioning  four  names,  and  ordering 
the  Company  to  elect  from  them.  The  four  mentioned  were  Sir 
Thomas  Smith,  Mr.  Johnson,  Sir  Thomas  Roe,  and  Mr.  Abbot. 
To  require  the  Company  to  elect  either  of  the  first-named  pair 
was  asking  it  to  sign  its  own  death-warrant.  Smith  was  now  tte 
open  enemy  of  a  majority  of  the  Company.  Johnson  was  a  fol- 
lower of  Smith,  under  whom  he  had  served  as  Deputy-Treasurer, 
and  was  fully  as  obnoxious  to  the  Company  as  his  principal. 
Abbot  was  an  obscure  merchant.  Roe  would  have  been  unques- 
tionably the  best  of  the  four.  He  was  the  greatest  of  those  half- 
commercial,  half-political  agents,  who  fill  so  large  a  space  in  the 
travels  of  that  age.  But  he  was  an  intimate  friend  of  Sir  Thomas 
Smith,  and  that  alone,  in  the  present  state  of  affairs,  was  fatal  to 
him  with  the  Company.  Moreover,  the  mere  fact  of  crown  in- 
terference, quite  apart  from  its  special  direction,  was  enough  to 
excite  distrust.  Accordingly  a  deputation  was  sent  to  wait  on 
the  king  and  to  request  him  to  reconsider  his  order.  Whether 
the  king's  courage  failed  him  in  the  face  of  a  decided  opposi- 

1  Virginia  Company,  p.  136.     Stith,  p.  157. 

2  Stith,  p.  193. 

8  A  New  Description  of  Virginia,  p.  9.     Force,  vol.  H. 

4  The  election  of  Southampton  is  described  with  great  animation  by  Peckard.  The  Com- 
pany's archives,  or  at  least  Mr.  Neill's  extracts  from  them,  are  scanty  on  this  point  Cf  Stith 
p.  178. 


z66  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

tion,  or  whether,  as  James  stated,  his  messenger  had  really  out- 
run his  commission,  is  uncertain.  According  to  the  king's  own 
account  he  had  merely  recommended  the  four  without  any  wish 
to  limit  the  Company  to  them.  If  this  were  so,  a  stranger  in- 
stance of  injudicious  interference  it  would  be  hard  to  find,  even 
in  the  history  of  James  I.  On  the  18th  of  June  Southampton 
was  unanimously  elected  without  a  ballot.  Nicholas  Ferrar  was 
elected  Deputy-Treasurer.  Sandys  did  not  wholly  withdraw  his 
services,  but  informally  retained  some  share  in  the  financial  man- 
agement. 

So  far  the  storm  had  blown  over,  but  the  Company  soon  ex- 
perienced the  hostility  of  the  crown  in  other  forms.  As  early  as 
Dispute  1 6 19  a  dispute  arose  about  the  tobacco  duty.  The 
kinhabout  cnarter  °f  tne  Company  exempted  it  from  any  duty 
tobacco.i  beyond  five  per  cent.  The  king  demanded  a  duty  of 
a  shilling  a  pound  on  Virginia  tobacco,  although  its  market  price 
was  but  five  shillings,  on  the  plea  that  Spanish  tobacco  sold  for 
■  twenty  shillings  a  pound.  At  last  the  dispute  was  settled  by  a 
-/  compromise,  and  the  Company  paid  the  increased  duty  in  con- 
sideration of  all  tobacco  culture  being  forbidden  in  the  kingdom. 
Two  years  later  a  monopoly  of  the  tobacco  trade  was  granted  to 
certain  private  persons,  and  by  their  request  a  proclamation  was 
issued  limiting  the  importation  of  tobacco  from  Virginia  and  the 
Somers  Islands  to  fifty-five  thousand  pounds.  The  Company, 
seeing  no  chance  of  getting  the  proclamation  reversed,  resolved 
to  make  the  best  of  matters.  The  Somers  Islands  were  even 
more  dependent  on  tobacco  than  Virginia,  Accordingly  the 
Company  decided  that  the  whole  fifty-five  thousand  pounds 
should  be  exported  thence,  and  that  the  Virginian  tobacco  should 
take  its  chance  in  the  markets  of  the  Netherlands.  Thereupon 
the  Privy  Council  met  them  with  a  prohibition  to  import  any  tobac- 
co into  foreign  markets.  The  leading  members  of  the  Company 
remonstrated,  but  their  remonstrances  were  only  treated  as  con- 
tumacy. At  last  in  162 1  Parliament  interfered,  and  though  it 
did  not  remove  either  the  monopoly  or  the  prohibition  on  foreign 
importation,  it  relieved  the  Company  from  the  limitation  on  the 
quantity  of  tobacco  to  be  imported. 

These  disturbances,  though  they  imperiled  the  welfare  of  the 
Company,  do  not  seem  to  have  interfered  with  the  prosperity 
of  the  settlers.     The  new  Governor,  Wyatt,  seems  to  have  fol- 

1  This  is  told  at  length  in  Stith,  p.  168  et  passim. 


COPLAND'S  SERMON.  167 

lowed  the  example  of  his  predecessor  Yeardley  in  loyalty  to  the 
Company,  and  in  moderation  and  wisdom  in  his  dealings  with 
state  of  the  the  settlers.  In  the  year  1619  alone  over  twelve  hun- 
descJibed  in  dred  persons  were  sent  out,  half  as  private  settlers  or 
sermon.8  servants, .  half  at  the  expense  of  the  Company.1  A 
good  idea  of  the  prosperity  of  the  colony  may  be  derived  from  a 
thanksgiving  sermon  preached  at  the  church  of  St.  Mary-le-Bow 
by  Copland  on  behalf  of  the  Company.2  The  enthusiastic  mis- 
sionary was  evidently  a  man  of  sound  practical  sense,  who  thor- 
oughly understood  the  sort  of  arguments  likely  to  have  weight 
with  London  traders  and  merchants.  Thus  his  sermon  is  not 
merely  an  exhortation,  but  a  business-like  statement  of  the  doings 
of  the  Company  for  the  few  preceding  years.  After  bidding  his 
hearers  thank  God  for  the  deliverance  of  the  colony  from  its 
early  troubles,  he  dwells  on  the  many  advantages  which  it  now 
held  out.  There  was  a  public  guest-house  for  the  reception  of 
new-comers.  The  iron-works,  glass-works,  and  salt-works  promised 
well.  The  country  yielded  abundance  of  corn  and  all  manner 
of  fruit.  The  copper  and  iron  mines  proved  rich,  and  there  was 
every  reason  to  hope  for  more  precious  metals.  He  then  in- 
stances as  special  matter  for  thankfulness  the  safe  arrival  of  a 
fleet  of 'nine  ships  during  the  past  year,  and  the  deliverance  of 
one  after  she  had  actually  been  captured  by  Turkish  pirates.  He 
dwells  on  the  need  of  sending  out  preachers,  "  not  such  as  offer 
themselves  hand  over  head,"  but  men  specially  fitted  for  the  task. 
In  conclusion,  he  speaks  of  the  overpeopled  state  of  the  mother- 
country,  and  need  of  providing  a  refuge  for  our  surplus  popula- 
tion. He  praises  the  wisdom  of  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen,  who 
had  twice  sent  out  a  hundred  poor  children  at  the  joint  expense 
of  the  City  and  the  Company,  and  he  contrasts  the  prosperous 
lot  of  a  settler  with  the  wretched  lot  of  a  starving  London 
workman. 

These  bright  hopes  for  the  future  of  Virginia  were  destined  to 
be  rudely  shattered.  In  July  tidings  reached  England  of  a  calam- 
The  ity  more  stupendous  than  any  which  had  yet  befallen 

massacre.*  the  colony.  The  peaceful  relations  with  the  Indians 
which  had  now  subsisted  for  seven  years  had  lulled  the  settlers 
into  false  safety.     During  the  life  of  Powhatan,  indeed,  the  friend- 


1  Declaratio7i  of  State  of  Colony,  pp.  5,  10. 

2  This  sermon  is  reproduced  by  Mr.  Neill.     English  Colonization,  p.  144. 

3  I  have  taken  this  account  of  the  massacre  mainly  from  Stith.     In  addition  to  Smith's 
History  and  the  Company's  Archives,  he  may  have  had  access  to  private  letters. 


iSS  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

ship  of  the  two  races  was  secure,  so  far  as  the  fickle  temper  of 
savages  can  admit  of  security.  It  is  clear  that  the  old  chief  was 
deeply  impressed  with  the  superior  skill  and  strength  of  the  white 
man,  and  we  may  well  believe  that  the  young  Rolfe  served  as  a 
hostage  for  the  good  behavior  of  his  grandfather.  But  in  1618 
Powhatan  died.  His  next  brother,  Opitchapan,  was  feeble  both 
in  mind  and  body.  Among  the  Indians  the  influence  of  moral 
and  physical  power  almost  always  overruled  that  of  titular  au- 
thority, and  the  chief  powe'r  virtually  devolved  on  a  third  brother, 
Opechancanough,  a  man  of  energetic  and  ambitious  temper  and 
a  master  of  dissimulation.  He  had  never  shared  his  brother's 
liking  for  the  English,  and  had  been  suspected  of  a  design  for 
cutting  them  off  at  Powhatan's  funeral.  The  plot,  however,  if 
plot  there  was,  came  to  nothing,  and  the  suspicions  of  the  settlers 
were  allayed.  Every  feeling  of  hostility  between  the  races  seemed 
to  have  vanished,  and  the  English  admitted  the  Indians  to  their 
tables  and  bed-chambers  without  a  thought  of  danger.  One  of 
the  leading  settlers,  George  Thorpe,  made  himself  conspicuous 
by  his  friendship  for  the  Indians.  He  had  given  up  a  post  at 
court  and  had  come  out  as  head  of  the  projected  Indian  college, 
intending  to  devote  his  life  to  the  salvation  of  the  heathen.  He 
especially  attached  himself  to  Opechancanough,  and  in  hopes  of 
his  conversion,  built  him  a  house  of  the  English  pattern,  with  a 
lock  and  key,  which  were  a  source  of  childish  delight  to  the  bar- 
barians. With  all  this  show  of  friendship,  Opechancanough  was 
but  biding  his  time  to  strike  one  final  blow  and  exterminate  the 
new-comers.  An  occasion  soon  offered  itself.  There  was  among 
the  Indians  a  noted  warrior  called  Nemattananow,  whose  courage 
and  fortunate  escapes  had  established  a  belief  among  his  country- 
men that  he  was  invulnerable  and  immortal.  His  reputation  even 
extended  among  the  settlers,  with  whom  he  went  by  the  name  of 
Jack  of  the  Feather  from  his  special  love  of  adornment.  This 
man  seems  to  have  inveigled  an  English  trader  named  Morgan 
into  the  Indian  country  and  there  to  have  murdered  him.  So 
little  did  Nemattananow  care  to  conceal  this  outrage  that  he 
soon  returned  to  Morgan's  own  settlement,  wearing  the  cap  of 
his  victim.  Morgan's  servants  at  once  suspected  mischief,  and 
endeavored  to  arrest  the  savage  and  to  bring  him  before  Thorpe, 
whose  friendship  for  the  Indians  was  a  guarantee  for  just  treat- 
ment. Nemattananow  resisted,  and  in  the  struggle  which  ensued 
he  was  mortally  wounded.     His  vanity  seems  to  have  been  even 


THE  MASSACRE.  169 

stronger  than  his  desire  for  revenge,  and  he  begged  his  captors 
to  conceal  his  death  from  his  countrymen  and  not  to  destroy  the 
belief  in  his  immortality.  How  the  secret  escaped  does  not  ap- 
pear, but  it  did  so. 

The  death  of  a  great  and  popular  warrior  gave  Opechancanough 
a  pretext  wherewith  to  rouse  the  fury  of  his  countrymen,  and  a 
general  massacre  was  arranged.  Fortunately,  however,  there  was 
at  least  one  Indian  on  whom  the  kindness  of  the  English  had  not 
been  thrown  away.  ■  A  settler  named  Pace  was  warned  of  the  im- 
pending attack  by  a  convert  who  lived  in  his  house.  Pace  at 
once  hurried  off  to  Jamestown  and  told  the  Governor  what  was  in- 
tended. Unfortunately,  the  scattered  state  of  the  colony,  where 
each  man  lived  on  his  own  farm,  made  it  impossible  to  concert  a 
plan  of  resistance,  or  even  to  send  warning  to  the  most  distant 
plantations ;  and  though  the  scheme  of  extermination  failed,  three 
hundred  and  forty-seven  of  the  settlers  were  slain.  Among  the 
first  to  perish  was  the  benefactor  of  Opechancanough,  Thorpe. 

The  nature  of  the  attack  served  to  show  hpw  deeply  imbued 
the  savages  were  with  dread  of  the  white  man,  and  what  slight 
precautions  might  have  kept  off  all  danger.  Almost  In  every  in- 
stance, where  the  first  onslaught  was  repulsed,  and  where  the 
English  summoned  up  courage  to  resist,  the  attack  failed.  In 
more  than  one  case  a  single  man  successfully  defended  his  house 
against  a  whole  band  of  savages.  The  rest  of  the  year  was  oc- 
cupied with  a  desultory  warfare  between  the_4vy„o  races.  As 
usual,  the  thriftless  habits  of  the  Indians  made  it  easy  for  the  Eng- 
lish, by  ravaging  theit  cornfields,  to  reduce  them  to  a  state  of 
famine,  and  before  the  winter  was  over,  the  blood  shed  in  the 
massacre  had  been  fully  avenged.  Next  year  war  was  carried 
on  in  the  same  manner.  The  Assembly  issued  a  quaintly-worded 
order,  that  "  the  inhabitants  of  every  plantation  should  fall  upon 
their  adjoining  savages."  Measures  were  taken  for  defense.  All 
houses  were  to  be  palisaded,  and  no  one  was  to  go  to  church  un- 
armed.1 We  may  assume  that  these  steps  were  effectual,  since 
for  some  years  no  Act  concerning  the  Indians  is  to  be  found  in 
the  statute-book.  *  v 

The  old  friendly  relations  between  the  two  races  were  of  course 
now  at  an  end ;  yet  it  must  be  said,  to  the  credit  of  the  settlers, 
that  the  injury  they  had  sustained  never  led  them  into  a  reck- 
less indifference  to  the  rights  of  the  savages. 

i  Hening's  Statutes  of  Virginia,  i.  127. 


Xy0  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 

The  massacre  was  a  crushing  blow  to  the  rising  hopes  of  the 
Company,  but  still  worse  evils  were  behind.  The  Company  had 
intrigues  already  offended  both  the  king  and  the  Parliament, 
of  Spain      anci  they  had  another  foe  in  the  background,  whose 

against  the  •'  ... 

Company.i  hostility  was  the  best  evidence  of  their  services  to  their 
own  country.  As  early  as  1612  the  Spanish  Government  had 
thrown  an  uneasy  eye  on  the  English  settlers  in  Virginia.  Early 
in  the  spring  of  that  year  rumors  reached  England  that  a  fleet 
of  thirteen  sail  was  making  ready  to  annihilate  the  infant  settle- 
ment at  Jamestown.2  These  warnings  were  more  fully  confirmed 
by  reports  from  Madrid  and  Paris  during  the  summer.  Later  in 
the  year  the  Spaniards  decided  to  hold  their  hands  and  to  see  if 
the  colony  would  not  fall  through  of  itself.  Little,  they  thought, 
could  come  of  an  undertaking  which  lacked  the  royal  support 
and  relied  on  such  uncertain  aid  as  public  lotteries.3  The  Span- 
iards who  had  been  sent  to  Virginia,  by  what  means  or  on  what 
pretext  does  not  appear,  brought  back  such  a  report  of  the  weak- 
ness of  the  colony  that  the  Spanish  Government  decided  to  leave 
it  to  its  fate.  At  the  same  time  Gondomar  sent  home  a  report 
which  cannot  but  fill  every  patriotic  Englishman  with  shame.  It 
contrasts  the  present  English  navy  with  that  of  the  last  reign. 
Then  every  Englishman  was  a  privateer ;  now  only  a  few  mer- 
chants went  out,  and  the  king's  ships  rotted  in  the  harbor.  The 
writer  complacently  looks  forward  to  a  time  when  the  same  de- 
crepitude should  show  itself  in  every  branch  of  the  service.4  But 
though  the  necessity  for  rooting  out  the  obnoxious  settlement  in 
Virginia  might  be  lessened,  we  may  be  sure  that  the  object  was 
not  forgotten.  Gondomar's  influence  over  James  and  his  court- 
iers was  matter  of  notoriety,  and  though  Spanish  intrigues  were 
too  craftily  carried  out  to  leave  their  traces  on  the  surface,  yet 
we  may  be  certain  that  common  belief  did  not  err  in  reckoning 
the  Spanish  ambassador  as  the  main  cause  of  the  downfall  of  the 
Virginia  Company. 

Besides,  there  were  various  circumstances  calculated  to  preju- 

1  It  is  probable  that  a  complete  examination  of  the  Spanish  Archives  would  reveal  even  more 
than  we  yet  know  on  this  point,  and  might  throw  light  on  the  judicial  murder  of  Raleigh  and 
other  dark  passages  in  the  Court  History  of  the  time.  We  know,  however,  fully  enough  to 
establish  the  fact  of  Spanish  intrigues  having  contributed  largely  to  the  overthrow  of  the 
Company.  Some  of  the  letters  referred  to  below  are  among  the  unpublished  papers  in  the 
Record  Office. 

2  Letter  from  Sir  John  Digby,  our  ambassador  at  Madrid,  to  Dudley  Carleton,  Octob-sr 
12,  1612. 

8  Digby  to  the  king,  Colonial  Papers,  May  13,  1613. 
4  This  report  is  in  the  Record  Office. 


BUTLER'S  CASE. 


171 


dice  public  opinion  against  the  Company  and  to  make  it  appear 
Butler's  a  not-ked  of  intrigues  and  squabbles.  A  certain  Cap- 
case.i  ta{n  Nathaniel  Butler,  Governor  of  the  Somers  Islands, 

got  into  trouble  on  a  charge  of  extorting  money  from  some  Span- 
iards who  had  been  wrecked  there.  The  charge  was  aggravated 
by  an  accusation  of  cruelty,  which  seems  to  have  been  unfounded, 
but  of  the  extortion  there  could  be  no  doubt.  Not  long  after 
Butler  addressed  a  memorial  to  the  government,  bringing  various 
charges  of  mismanagement  against  the  Virginia  Company.  There 
is  no  direct  evidence  of  a  connection  between  the  two  events, 
but  it  is  at  least  a  suspicious  fact  that  we  find  the  charges  against 
Butler  disappear,  while  almost  simultaneously  he  comes  forward 
as  the  assailant  of  the  Virginia  Company.  His  attack  was  con- 
tained in  a  pamphlet  called  the  "  Unmasked  Face  of  our  Colony 
in  Virginia  as  it  was  in  the  Winter  of  1622."2  Without  going 
through  his  charges  in  detail,  it  is  enough  to  say  that  some  of 
them  were  untrue,  while  others  pointed  out  either  trivial  evils  or 
those  which  could  hardly  be  avoided  in  a  newly-settled  country 
and  which  the  Company  was  striving  to  amend.  The  attack  was 
answered,  not  by'  the  <po#ripany,  but  far  more  convincingly,  by 
thirty-four  leading  men  among  the  settlers,  including  Wyatt  and 
Yeardley.  Their  answer  shows  how  Butler's  previous  misconduct 
in  Virginia  unfitted  him  to  be  a  witness,  and  how  all  the  more 
serious  evils  which  he  points  out,  the  occasional  scarcity  of  food, 
the  poverty  of  the  houses,  and  the  loss  of  life  among  the  settlers, 
were  due  to  the  policy  of  that  very  section  of  the  Company  which 
the  present  leaders  had  done  their  best  to  oppose.  In  truth,  as 
far  as  Butler's  attack  proved  anything,  it  showed  how  much 
credit  the  leaders  of  the  Company  deserved  for  having  rescued 
the  colony  from  the  misery  to  which  it  had  been  brought  by  the 
mismanagement  of  Sir  Thomas  Smith.  Nevertheless,  we  may  be 
sure  that  Butler's  attack  did  something  to  discredit  the  Company 
with  the  unthinking  and  uninquiring,  and  to  furnish  its  assailants 
with  a  pretext  for  attack. 

Butler  was  not  the  only  private  enemy  whom  the  Company 

1  The  particulars  of  this  are  to  be  found  in  a  collection  of  documents  among  the  Colonial 
Papers,  chiefly  letters  from  Butler. 

2  Butler's  attack  and  the  colonists'  reply  are  to  be  found  in  the  Virginia  Company,  p.  395. 
The  connection  between  Butler's  attack  and  the  suppression  of  the  Spanish  charges  is 
pointed  out  in  the  Discourse  of  the  Old  Company.  It  also  points  out  how  Argall's  services 
as  an  instrument  for  the  destruction  of  the  Company  were  similarly  procured  by  the  suppress- 
ion of  a  charge  of  piracy  brought  against  him  by  the  Spanish  Government. 


I73  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

had  to  fear.  A  certain  Captain  Bargrave  complained  of  wrongs 
Bargrave's  ^one  to  ^m  as  a  landholder  in  Virginia.  According 
c*%*-1  to  Sir  Thomas  Smith,  against    whom   his  complaints 

were  specially  directed,  he  was  an  unauthorized  squatter.  It 
would  seem  as  if  his  claims  were  in  some  way  mixed  up  with 
Martin's,  and  if  this  was  so,  both  cases  illustrated  the  mischief  of 
allowing  private  settlements  independent  of  the  general  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  Company.  It  would  be  unfair  to  class  Bargrave's  at- 
tack with  Butler's.  It  is  quite  possible  that  he  had  real  griev- 
ances against  Sir  Thomas  Smith,  and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  he  was 
one  of  the  victims  to  Argall's  rapacity.  He  himself  frankly  ac- 
knowledged how  great  an  improvement  had  been  wrought  by 
fhe  present  management;  and  so,  like  Butler,  he  in  reality  bore 
witness  to  its  efficiency.  It  is  noteworthy  that  we  do  not  find 
any  disposition,  among  the  supporters  of  Southampton  and  San- 
dys, to  use  Bargrave  as  a  tool  against  Smith. 

In  addition  to  these  troubles  with  Butler  and  Bargrave,  Brews- 
ter's grievance  seems  to  have  been  still  unredressed,  and  a  new 
enemy  arose  in  the  heir  and  nephew  to  Sir  George  Somers,  Mat- 
thew Sorners,  who  had  certain  claims  against  the  Company.2 

Besides  these  individual  attacks,  a  number  of  other  influences 
contributed  to  weigh  down  the  hopes  of  the  Company.  The 
other  in-  massacre  had  impressed  the  public,  and  not  altogether 
prejudicial  unjustly,  with  a  strong  idea  of  the  carelessness  and  ill 
pany?  om"  discipline  of  the  settlers.3  A  neglected  harvest,  fol- 
lowed by  scarcity  and  sickness,  was  the  natural  consequence  of 
the  massacre.4  The  powers  at  work  on  behalf  of  the  Company 
began  to  flag.  Sermons  were  no  longer  heard  setting  forth  the 
claims  of  Virginia  and  the  duty  of  converting  the  heathen  and  of 
providing  homes  beyond  the  sea  for  paupers  and  criminals.  Sub- 
scribers stood  aloof;  the  Company  became  alarmed  by  the  ru- 
mors of  impending  attack,  and  the  ships  loaded  with  supplies  for 
the  settlement  lingered  in  the  Thames.5  In  another  way  events 
had  taken  a  turn  unfavorable  to  the  Company.  The  king's  de- 
sire for  the  Spanish  marriage  was  at  its  height,  and  Spain,  as  we 
have  seen,  looked  on  the  Company  as  rivals  and  enemies.  In 
this  matter  the  memory  of  James  has  met  with  gentler  usage  than 

1  The  papers  referring  to  Bargrave's  case  are  to  be  found  in  the  Colonial  Papers,  ii.  7,  8; 
iii.  11,  12;  and  Colonial  Entry  Book,  lxxix.  p.  202. 
8  Virginia  Company,  p.  55. 

•  Chamberlain  to  Carleton  ;   Colonial  Papers,  July  13,  1622. 
4  Discourse  0/ the  Old  Company.  8  f*«/ 


NICHOLAS  FERRAR. 

that  of  his  grandson.  To  have  been  the  pensioner  of  France  has 
ever  been  justly  deemed  the  crowning  infamy  in  the  character  of  • 
Charles  II.,  a  stain  even  transcending  his  gross  private  vices. 
Base  indeed  it  was  for  the  successor  of  Cromwell  to  be  the  vassal 
of  Lewis ;  but  if  there  be  room  for  comparison  in  such  infamy,  it 
was  yet  baser  for  the  successor  of  Elizabeth  to  truck  away  the 
welfare  of  his  subjects  and  the  honor  of  his  kingdom  for  the  fickle 
and  grudging  favor  of  a  Spanish  king,  degenerate  even  in  his 
tyranny. 

Such,  then,  were  the  hostile  influences,  made  up  of  court  in- 
trigue, private  greed  and  covetousness,  and  lack  of  public  spirit, 
which  hung  like  a  storm-cloud,  ready  to  break,  upon  the  Com- 
pany. 

Before  we  enter  upon  the  somewhat  intricate  train  of  events 
which  followed,  we  must  turn  our  attention  to  a  new  actor  who 
Nicholas  now  assumed  a  leading  place  in  the  counsels  of  the 
Ferrar.'  Virginia  Company.v  The  name  of  Nicholas  Ferrar  is 
better  known  to  students  of  ecclesiastical  than  of  political  history, 
and  the  irregular  quasi-monastic  society  which  he  founded  and 
superintended  at  Little  Giddings,  though  not  more  honorable  to 
his  fame,  has  perhaps  better  claims  to  general  attention  than  his 
brief  term  of  office  as  Treasurer  of  the  Virginia  Company.  We 
may  be  sure  that  it  is  to  the  later  part  of  his  career  that  we  owe 
the  record  of  a  laborious  and  affectionate  biographer,  who  has 
thus  preserved  a  number  of  incidents  which  are  to  us  of  the 
greatest  historical  interest  and  importance.  Nicholas  Ferrar  was 
an  offshoot  of  one  of  those  great  mercantile  houses,  like  the 
Loks  and  the  Salternes,  to  whom  our  early  efforts  in  discovery 
and  colonization  owe  so  much.  Ferrar  himself  may  be  looked 
upon  as  embodying  many  of  the  best  characteristics  of  the  cult- 
ured gentleman  of  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries.  In 
politics  he  was  of  the  party  of  Selden,  soon  to  be  the  party  of 
Eliot  and  Hampden,  the  party  which  claimed  the  allegiance  of  all 
the  foremost  members  of  the  Virginia  Company.  In  religion  he 
represented  that  Catholic  revival,  which  is  identified  with  the 
names  of  Laud  and  Andrews ;  and  Ferrar's  public  career  is  a  proof 
that  the  Church  policy  of  Laud  and  the  civil  principles  of  Strafford, 
though  often  allied,  were  not  necessarily  or  vitally  connected.  His 
youth  was  marked  by  that  precocity  of  moral  and  intellectual  de- 
velopment and  by  that  tone  of  gravity  which  often  seem  to  foreshad- 

1  For  his  biography  see  p.  164. 


I74  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

ow  an  untimely  death ;  the  feebleness  of  his  constitution  threat- 
ened to  confirm  these  fears,  and  may  have  had  its  share  in  induc- 
ing him  to  abandon  a  career  full  of  promise  for  a  life  of  religious  se- 
clusion. The  foreign  travels  which  followed  upon  a  brilliant  career 
at  Cambridge  are  told  by  his  biographer  with  a  graphic  fidelity 
which  makes  even  commonplace  incidents  picturesque ;  and  the 
whole  narrative  might  serve  as  a  fitting  comment  on  Bacon's  Essay 
on  Travel  at  a  time  when  a  visit  to  foreign  countries  was  in  reality 
a  branch  of  liberal  education.  In  1618  Ferrar  returned  to  Eng- 
land, and  even  then,  at  the  age  of  twenty-six,  he  would  have 
preferred  the  seclusion  of  college  life  to  the  public  employment 
which  his  family  connection  soon  forced  upon  him.  His  fa- 
ther's age,  however,  made  it  almost  needful  that  the  son  should 
share  the  burden  imposed  by  the  affairs  of  the  Virginia  Com- 
pany ;  and  when  in  the  following  year  the  elder  Ferrar  died,  the 
son  at  once  stood  forward  among  the  leading  members.  Imme- 
diately upon  his  return  he  had  been  .appointed  to  a  position 
of  trust  in  the  Company,  and  in  1622  he  was  elected  Treas- 
urer in  the  stead  of  his  brother.  To  this  appointment  we 
owe  a  large  share  of  our  existing  information  as  to  the  latter  days 
of  the  Company,  preserved,  as  I  have  before  said,  by  the  kins- 
man and  biographer  of  Ferrar,  rather  for  the  sake  of  its  personal 
than  its  historical  interest. 

We'  have  already  seen  how  the  Virginia  tobacco  trade  had 
been  the  means  of  entangling  the  Company  in  its  first  dispute 
Tobacco  witn  tne  crown.  In  1622  a  fresh  difficulty  arose, 
contract  That  crafty  and  unprincipled  statesman,  Lord  Mid- 
dlesex, told  certain  members  of  the  Company  that  evil  reports 
about  them  were  on  foot,  and  that  the  king  had  been  set  against 
them,  and  that  it  would  be  best  to  antic^ite  mischief  and  to 
propitiate  the  court  by  offering  a  large  percentage  on  all  tobacco 
brought  into  the  kingdom,  while  the  Company,  in  return,  should 
be  granted  a  monopoly  of  importation.  The  Company  at  first, 
in  their  own  language,  "  refused  the  gilded  pill,"  but  at  length 
the  wish  to  avert  the  king's  displeasure  and  tne  temptation  of 
the  monopoly  were  too  much  for  them.  Although  the  king  in- 
serted the  monstrous  condition  that  the  Company  should  import 
at  least  forty  thousand  pounds  weight  of  .Spanish  tobacco,  a  con- 
dition doubtless  intended  to  gratify  the  Spanish  Court,  the  Com- 

1  I  have  taken  this  account  from  the  Discourse  of  the  Old  Company  and  from  Stith. 


THE  TOBACCO  CONTRACT.  i75 

pany,  after  some  discussion,  accepted  the  agreement.     Its  princi- 
pal conditions  were  : 

i.  That  no  tobacco  should  be  grown  in  England  or  imported 
by  any  person  except  the  Virginia  and  Somers  Island  Com- 
panies. 

2.  That  in  consideration  of  this  the  Company  should  grant 
the  King  a  third  of  the  proceeds  of  all  their  tobacco. 

3.  That  they  should  also  import  not  more  than  sixty,  nor  less 
than  forty,  thousand  pounds  of  Spanish  tobacco. 

For  the  time  being  the  Company  might  well  suppose  that  they 
had  bribed  their  great  enemy  into  acquiescence,  and  that  they 
Faxons  had  in  some  measure  identified  their  own  interests  with 
company,  those  of  the  Spanish  court.  Events  soon  showed  how 
ill-founded  were  such  hopes.  From  the  very  outset  the  new  con- 
tract was  a  fruitful  source  of  disaster.  As  might  be  supposed, 
so  substantial  an  addition  to  the  business  of  the  Company  could 
not  be  undertaken  without  an  immediate  increase  of  the  working 
staff,  and  the  offices  which  had  to  be  called  into  existence  involved 
the  payment  of  two  thousand  a  year  in  salaries.  This  at  once 
gave  rise  to  a  series  of  disputes  whose  precise  nature  may  be  in- 
volved in  some  uncertainty,  but  whose  pernicious  effect  can  be  a 
matter  of  no  doubt.  A  certain  Mr.  Wrote,  hitherto,  it  is  said,  a 
loyal  and  zealous  member  of  the  Company,  felt  aggrieved  at  the 
additional  expense  involved  in  the  new  contract.1  It  is  difficult 
to  say  whether  Wrote  was  really  one  of  the  faction  of  Sir  Thomas 
Smith,  Lord  Warwick,  and  Argall,  a  faction  which  now  -almost 
openly  lent  itself  to  the  court  in  its  designs oipon^trre-  Company, 
or  whether,  as  seems  rather  more  probable,  he  was  really  an  hon- 
est but  violent  and  wrong-headed  man.  If  the  latter,  one  can 
easily  see  how  valuable  a  tool  he  might  be  to  the  opponents  of 
the  Company.  The  characters  of  Smith  and  Argall  were  already 
tainted,  and  their  relations  to  the  Company  were  such  that  they 
could  make  no  pretense  of  impartiality  in  their  dealings  with  it. 
A  member  of  the  Company  who  honestly  believed  that  the  lead- 
ing men,  Southampton  and  supporters,  were  using  the  Company 
as  an  instrument  to  increase  their  own  patronage  and  profit,  was 
exactly  the  tool  needed  by  the  court  to  give  a  semblance  of  fair- 
ness to  their  attacks.  Whatever  might  be  the  purity  of  Wrox's  in- 
tentions, there  seems  little  doubt  of  the  violence  with  which  he 
expressed  his  views,  or  of  the  fairness  with  which  Southampton 

1  Virginia  Compatiy,  p.  385.     Stith,  p.  254. 


I76  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

dealt  with  him.  A  scheme  of  financial  reform  which  Wrote 
brought  forward  was  partially  discussed,  and  at  length  rejected 
by  the  unanimous  vote  of  the  Company. 

Unreasonable  as  Wrote  was,  it  is  easy  to  see  how  his  action 
might  prejudice  the  Company  in  public  estimation.  It  needs  little 
experience  of  a  corporation  to  know  how  one  factious  member 
can  drag  the  whole  body  into  a  series  of  conflicts,  in  which  it  is 
scarcely  possible  for  the  majority  to  always  preserve  the  appear- 
ance of  fairness,  even  when  there  is  no  substantial  ground  for 
complaint  against  them. 

The  Company  now  obtained  the  name  out  of  doors  of  a  very 
hot -bed  of  quarrels,  whose  meetings  were  rendered  unseemly  by 
The  Com-  the  wranglings  and  recriminations  of  its  members.1  At 
Erought  length  the  two  factions  were  summoned  before  the 
Priv" the  Lord  Treasurer.  The  only  result  of  these  meetings 
Council.  seems  to  have  been  to  give  opportunity  for  an  attack  up- 
on Southampton  and  for  an  easily  refuted  charge  against  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Company.2  The  matter  soon  reached  a  further 
stage.  Johnson,  who,  as  we  have  seen,  was  one  of  the  foremost 
among  the  enemies  of  the  Company,  lodged  a  petition  with  the 
Privy  Council,  calling  attention  to  various  alleged  defects  in  the 
management  of  the  Company.3  Probably  in  consequence  of  this 
attack  the  Company  were  summoned  before  the  Privy  Council 
to  answer  various  charges  brought  against  them*  The  principal 
subject  discussed  was  the  tobacco  contract.  The  Company  sug- 
gested various  amendments  whereby  the  business  might  be  made 
more  profitable  to  all  parties.  The  meeting  apparently  ended 
satisfactorily,  when  suddenly  all  further  concern  about  the  matter 
was  stopped  by  an  order  from  the  king  annulling  the  contract. 

The  events  which  followed,  and  the  dealings  of  the  Privy 
Council  with  the  Company,  were  so  complicated,  and  the  records 
Further  of  them  are  so  fragmentary,  that  it  is  impossible  to  present 
attacks.  them  in  the  form  of  a  consecutive  narrative.  It  must 
be  enough  to  give  the  leading  features  of  the  struggle,  and  to 
single  out  a  few  episodes  which  illustrate  the  spirit  in  which  the 
attack  was  conducted.  From  the  outset  the  court  manifestly 
hoped  that  the  matter  would  be  ended  by  a  surrender  of  the 
Company's  patent;    a  step  which,   whatever  its  formal  results 

•  Chamberlain  to  Carleton,  Colonial  Papers,  1623,  April  19  and  July  26. 

*  Peckard,  p.  168.     They  were  accused  of  sending  inflammatory  letters  to  the  authorities 
in  Virginia.     When  brought  before  the  Privy  Council,  the  charge  at  once  fell  to  the  ground. 

•Johnson's  petition  is  published  by  Mr.  Neill,  Virginia  Company,  p.  387 


ATTEMPTS  TO  CRIPPLE  THE  COMPANY. 


177 


might  have  been,  would  have  practically  signed  the  death-warrant 
of  the  corporation.  With  this  view,  the  Company  was  more  than 
once  brought  before  the  Privy  Council.  Distracted  as  it  was  by 
internal  divisions,  it  might  well  have  been  expected  that  the  Com- 
pany would  have  given  way,  but  it  was  not  so.  The  courage 
with  which  they  fought  out  their  hopeless  battle  forms  a  fitting 
end  to  a  glorious  career. 

As  I  said  before,  a  few  leading  episodes  will  serve  to  illustrate 
the  temper  in  which  the  contest  was  conducted.  The  court  at- 
Members  tempted  to  seduce  Ferrar  by  offers  of  high  preferment, 
imprisoned,  j-^  jn  vam>i  Persuasion  having  failed,  force  was  tried. 
On  the  strength  of  a  memorial  presented  by  LorcUWarwick,  ac- 
cusing the  opposite  party  of  intemperate  language  and  misrepre- 
sentation, the  two  Ferrars,  Sandys,  and  Lord_Cavendish,  who  were 
now  taking  a  prominent  part  in  the  councils  of  the  Company, 
were  confined  to  their  separate  houses  by  an  order  of  the  Privy 
Council,  and  thus  deprived  of  all  opportunity  of  conference  or 
united  action.2  There  is  some  reason,  too,  to  think  that  a  like 
measure  was  adopted  for  incapacitating  Southampton  from  further 
activity.3 

Other  measures  were  taken  to  cripple  the  Company  for  self- 
defense.     On  Thursday,  the  13th  of  April,  a  document  was  laid 

The  articles  before  the  Company,  containing  thirty-nine  articles  of 
of  indidt-      .    ,.  i  •      ,       T         .        ,.    „    , 

ment.  indictment,  and  an  answer  required.     In  spite  of  all  the 

representations  of  the  Company,  the  Council  insisted  on  receiving 
the  answer  before  Monday,  the  17th.  The  task  seemed  hopeless, 
but  the  energy  of  the  Treasurer  and  his  friends  was  equal  to  the 
need.  The  charges  were  divided  into  three  heads,  and  the  duty  of 
answering  them  was  apportioned  to  Ferrar,  Sandys,  and  Cavendish. 
Six  copying  clerks  were  employed  day  and  night,  and  by  the  re- 
quired time  an  answer  was  produced.4 

Another.proof  of  the  spirit  in  which  the  court  dealt  with  the 
Company  was  shown  by  the  selection  of  Commissioners  to  in- 
quire into  the  affairs  of  Virginia.  The  first  Commissioners  were 
appointed  early  in  1623,  with  full  instructions  to  investigate  the 

1  Peckard,  p.  165,  states  that  Ferrar  was  offered  his  choice  of  the  clerkship  to  the  Council, 
or  the  embassy  to  the  court  of  Savoy. 

2  Virginia  Company,  p.  411.     Colonial  Entry  Book,  lxxix.  p.  205. 

3  Peckard,  p.  165.  I  can  find  no  direct  proof  of  Southampton's  imprisonment  in  the  State 
Papers.  At  the  same  time  Peckard's  statement  is  confirmed,  or  at  least  rendered  probable,  by 
Southampton's  absence  on  one  or  two  important  occasions. 

4  Peckard,  p.  174. 

12 


i78 


THE   VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 


whole  management  of  the  colony.  In  the  selection  of  these 
Commissioners  there  was,  as  far  as  our  present  knowledge  en- 
Appoint-  ables  us  to  judge,  nothing  to  which  the  friends  of  the 
Commls-  Company  could  reasonably  object.  We  cannot  now 
sioners.  trace  the  precise  steps  by  which  the  commission  was  en- 
larged, or  whether  it  was  reconstituted  with  fresh  powers,  but 
this  much,  at  least,  is  certain,  that  at  a  later  day  it  contained 
among  its  members  Argall,  Johnson,  Pory,  and  Sir  Thomas 
Smith,1  all  of  them  personally  hostile  to  the  Company,  and  with 
characters  blemished  by  their  previous  dealings  with  the  affairs 
of  the  colony.  As  if  to  declare  the  open  and  avowed  unfairness 
of  their  proceedings,  they  met  at  the  house  of  Sir  Thomas  Smith , 
who  had  been  for  six  years  the  vindictive  enemy  of  the  party  of 
Southampton  and  Sandys.2 

The  best  evidence  perhaps  on  behalf  of  the  Company  is  the 
unanimous  support  which  it  received  from  the  settlers  in  Virginia. 
The  coio-  Had  the  enemies  of  the  Company  received  the  least 
poSrtStneP"  semblance  of  support  from  the  settlers,  we  may  be  cer- 
Company.  tain  it  would  have  been  ostentatiously  paraded.  In 
such  a  case  the  absence  of  evidence  is  in  itself  the  best  evidence 
that  can  be  had.  We  cannot  doubt  that  it  was  a  knowledge  of 
the  feeling  prevalent  in  the  colony,  which  induced  the  Privy 
Council  to  issue  an  order  that  all  letters  sent  thence  should  be  in- 
tercepted and  laid  before  them.3  It  is  therefore  no  matter  for 
surprise  that  we  have  no  documents  setting  forth  the  views  of  in- 
dividuals which  can  be  opposed  to  those  of  Butler  and  Johnson. 

But  though  no  expressions  of  individual  feeling  were  permitted 
to  become  public,  the  colonists  were  able  to  make  known  their 
views.  Two  documents  were  sent  home  by  them.  One  was  that 
general  report  of  the  state  of  the  colony  to  which  I  have  already 
referred.4  That  which  accompanied  it  was  even  more  striking. 
It  was  an  address  to  the  Privy  Council  drawn  up  by  the  Gov- 
ernor, Council,  and  Assembly  of  Virginia.5  This  address,  after 
exonerating  the  colonial  government,  and  indirectly  the  Com- 
pany, from  various  charges  of  mismanagement,  expressed  an 
opinion  that  there  was  no  need  for  any  change.  The  circum- 
stances under  which  this  address  was  drawn  up  increase  its  value. 

1  Their  names  will  be  found  appended  to  various  documents  in  the  Colonial  Papers. 
»  Colonial  Papers,  1624,  July. 

8  Colonial  Entry  Book,  lxxix.  p.  210.  *P.   171. 

8  Virginia  Company,  p.  407.     Colonial  Papers,  1623,  February.     This  document  is  en- 
titled The  Tragical  Declaration  of  the  Virginia  Assembly. 


VIRGINIA  HANDED  OVER  TO  THE  CROWN.         jjg 

Certain  of  the  Commissioners  had  landed  in  Virginia,  and  with  a 
view  to  entrap  the  Assembly  into  sanctioning  their  proceedings, 
had  laid  before  it  a  form  of  subscription,  testifying  thankfulness 
for  the  king's  care  of  the  colony,  consenting  to  the  revocation  of 
old  patents,  and  accepting  a  new  charter.  The  snare  was  laid  in 
vain.  The  Governor,  Council,  and  Assembly  replied  to  the  sug- 
gestion by  stating  that  they  had  already  thanked  the  king  for 
his  care  of  the  colony,  and  that  they  would  deal  with  the  ques- 
tion of  surrendering  the  patent  when  it  formally  came  before 
them.  To  this  they  added  a  hope  that  the  king,  having  been 
misinformed,  would,  on  further  knowledge,  abandon  his  intended 
change  in  the  government  of  the  colony.  The  Assembly  appar- 
ently went  still  further,  and  sent  in  a  separate  answer,  questioning 
the  authority  of  the  Commissioners  to  make  such  a  proposal  and 
inquiring  the  extent  of  their  authority.  The  Assembly  obtained 
a  complete  triumph,  and  the  defeated  Commissioners  had  to  ac- 
knowledge that  they  had  in  this  particular  matter  acted  without 
authority  or  instruction.1 

Though  the  evidence  of  the  colonists  was  but  negative  testi- 
mony, it  is  scarcely  possible  to  overrate  its  value.  Everything 
tended  to  urge  them  to  take  the  part  of  the  crown  against  the 
Company.  If  the  charges  of  neglect  and  mismanagement 
brought  against  the  Company  had  been  true,  we  may  be  sure 
that  the  colonists  would  gladly  have  seized  the  chance  of  winning 
redress  and  obtaining  a  change  of  masters.  Even  without  this 
they  might  have  been  led  on  by  a  desire  to  propitiate  the  side 
which  in  the  long  run  seemed  certain  to  prevail.  Yet  in  spite  of 
all  this  they  stood  loyally  by  the  Company,  and  proved  that  if 
its  rule  had  not  been  gainful  to  its  members,  it  had  earned  the 
higher  praise  of  being  beneficial  and  acceptable  to  the  colonists. 

The  enemies  of  the  Company  now  felt  that  things  were  ripe 
for  an  open  and  undisguised  attack.  In  July,  1623,  the  Attorney - 
Coundiiivy  anc*  Solicitor- Generals  reported  to  the  king  that  they 
transfers      had  considered  the  case  of  Virginia,  and  recommended 

the  govern- 

ment  of  the  that  he  should  take  the  government  of  the  colony  into 
the°crown.  his  own  hands.2  In  October  an  order  of  the  Privy 
Council  was  issued,  announcing  the  intention  of  the  king  to  re- 
sume the  charter  and  to  establish  a  new  constitution.3     The  pro- 

1  All  these  documents  will  be  found  in  the  Colonial  Papers,  1624,  March  2  and  3. 

2  Colonial  Papers,  1623,  July  31. 

3  lb.,  1623,  Oct  8. 


jSo  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

posed  change  would  transfer  the  home  government  of  the  colony 
to  a  Council  appointed  by  the  king,  and  would  likewise  vest  the 
s appointment  of  the  Governor  and  colonial  Council  in  the  crown. 
In  other  words  it  transferred  to  the  crown  the  whole  control  of 
the  colony,  leaving  the  Company  simply  in  the  position  of  a  trad- 
ing body,  and  as  such,  dependent  for  its  position  and  privileges 
on  the  favor  of  the  king.  The  high  spirit  which  had  sustained 
the  leaders  of  the  Company  did  not  now  fail  them,  and  they  re- 
fused to  give  up  their  rights.1  Accordingly  a  quo  warranto  was 
issued,  ordering  the  Company  to  justify  its  tenure  of  privileges,  as 
being  for  the  public  good,  and  upon  failure  of  such  justification, 
to  surrender  its  charter. 

The  Company  now  sought  help  in  a  new  quarter.  More  than 
one  cause  led  them  to  believe  that  they  might  now  fight  their  battle 
Attempt  to  in  Parliament  with  some  hope  of  success.  In  February, 
rnatfer  be-  1 624,  a  new  House  of  Commons  was  elected  and  vari- 
ment.ar  ia"  ous  leading  members  of  the  Virginia  Company  were  re- 
turned as  menibers.  The  failure  of  the  Spanish  marriage  and  the 
disgrace  of  iord  Keeper  Middlesex  seemed  materially  to  alter 
the  prospects  of  the  Company.  Accordingly  a  petition  was 
drawn  up  and  presented  to  Parliament,  setting  forth  the  services 
which  the  Company  had  done  to  the  nation,  and  the  future  good 
which  might  be  looked  for  from  its  labors.  The  petition  was 
favorably  received,  and  a  committee  appointed  to  consider  the 
case  of  the  Company.  But  before  any  steps  could  be  taken,  a 
message  came  down  from  the  king  warning  the  House  that  the  ad- 
ministration of  Virginian  affairs  had  been  specially  entrusted  to  the 
Privy  Council,  and  forbidding  any  interference.  The  House 
acquiesced  in  the  prohibition,  not,  we  are  told,  without  open  ex- 
pressions of  discontent.2 

The  end  was  now  at  hand.  In  July,  after  various  delays,  the 
case  came  into  court.  If  we  may  believe  Ferrar's  biographer, 
The  patent  the  main  argument  brought  against  the  Company  by 
revoked.  the  opposing  Counsel  was  of  so  frivolous  a  character 
as  to  be  an  open  admission  that  the  case  had  been  prejudged. 
The  Attorney-General  attacked  the  patent  on  the  ground  that  it 
granted  the  privilege  of  transporting  the  king's  subjects  to  Vir- 
ginia, a  privilege  which,  if  continuously  exercised,  might  in  time 
depopulate  the  realm  and  transfer  the  whole  English  nation  to 

1  Colonial  Papers^  1623,  October  15,  17  and  20. 

*  For  the  petition  and  its  fate  see  Virginia  Company,  p.  415. 


ARCHIVES  OF  THE  COMPANY.  tSi 

the  dominion  of  the  Company.1  But  it  mattered  not  whether 
the  plea  was  good  or  bad.  The  patriotic  spirit  of  resistance 
which  had  shown  itself  so  fully  in  the  Company,  and  which  was 
gradually  awakening  in  Parliament,  had  no  place  in  the  law 
courts,  and  on  the  24th  of  July,  1624,  judgment  was  pronounced, 
declaring  the  patent  null  and  void.2 

Only  one  episode  remains  to  be  told.  Early  in  1624  there 
was  reason  to  suspect  that  the  court,  among  its  manceuvers  against 
Subsequent  the  Company,  was  attempting  to  obtain  possession  of 
the  Com-  the  archives.  The  unscrupulous  conduct  of  the  court 
ords!ss  rec*  party  in  intercepting  Virginian  letters  might  reasonably 
alarm  the  leaders  of  the  Company.  Southampton  and  his  fol- 
lowers felt  that  their  own  character  and  their  dealings  with  the 
colony  could  only  be  justified  to  posterity  by  preserving  the 
formal  records  of  their  proceedings.  Accordingly  a  copying 
clerk  was  procured  and  locked  up  for  safety  in  a  room  in  Sir  John 
Danvers's  house.  The  minutes  of  the  Company  were  copied,  and 
then  verified  and  attested  by  the  Secretary,  Edward  Collingwood. 
The  story  goes,  that  when  the  documents  were  taken  to  Lord 
Southampton,  he  embraced  Danvers  in  his  gratitude,  and  ex- 
claimed, "  These  are  the  evidences  of  my  honor,  and  I  value 
them  more  than  the  evidences  of  my  land."  In  truth,  the 
papers  were  the  evidence,  not  only  of  the  honor  of  Southampton, 
but  of  the  unswerving  fidelity  with  which  the  Company  had  dis- 
charged its  trust.  The  originals  were  lost,  or  possibly  destroyed 
by  those  enemies  whose  reputation  was  compromised  by  them. 
The  copies  met  with  a  better  fate.  Purchased  from  the  South- 
ampton family  by  an  American  antiquary,  they  served  as  the 
basis  for  Stith's  manly  and  outspoken  vindication  of  the  Vir- 
ginia Company.  At  a  later  day  they  passed  into  the  hands  of  a 
Virginian  statesman,  who,  with  all  his  faults,  was  as  determined  an 
enemy  to  tyranny  of  every  kind  as  Southampton  or  Sandys,  and 
at  the  death  of  Jefferson  they  found  a  fitting  place  in  the  library 
of  the  American  Congress.  To  the  possession  of  these  papers 
we  owe  our  detailed  and  minute  knowledge  of  the  history  of  the 
Virginia  Company. 

The  struggle  between  the  crown  and  the  Company,  as  far  as 
our  sympathies  and  approval  are  concerned,  needs  little  comment 

1  Peckard  p.  175. 

2  Virginia  Company,  p.  417. 

3  The  history  of  the  records  is  told  by  Mr.  Neill  in  his  introduction  to  them.     Cf.  Peckard, 
p.  178. 


!82  THE  VIRGINIA   COMPANY. 

There,  as  so  often  in  history,  our  feelings  are  all  enlisted  on  that 
side  whose  defeat  we  must  nevertheless  deliberately  believe  to 
have  been  productive  of  good.  Morally  and  politically, 
-one  usion.  jn(jee(^  t]ie  abrogation  of  the  Virginian  charter  was  a 
crime.  It  was  one  of  the  earliest  of  those  efforts  in  which  the 
Stuart  reigns  were  so  fruitful,  efforts  to  wrest  the  process  of  law 
to  the  arbitrary  purposes  of  the  crown.  It  was  part  of  that 
policy  which  sent  Raleigh  to  the  scaffold,  and  which  sought  to 
make  England  the  friend,  almost  the  vassal,  of  the  oppressor 
whose  rod  she  had  broken.  Yet  it  would  be  flattery  to  give  it  a 
high  place  among  the  misdeeds  of  the  Stuarts.  When  we  think 
of  James's  public  crimes,  of  the  death  of  Raleigh,  of  the  living 
entombment  of  Arabella  Stuart,  still  more  when  we  recall  his 
private  life  and  that  court  where  the  foul  creatures  of  Eastern 
despotism,  the  intriguer,  the  favorite,  the  poisoner,  found  honor 
and  reward,  we  may  well  echo  the  prayer  of  the  Roman  satirist 
and  wish  that  such  trifles  as  the  overthrow  of  the  Virginia  Com- 
pany had  furnished  full  work  for  that  mean  mind  and  bad  heart. 
The  dissolution  of  the  Company  was  one  of  those  cases  where  a 
base  and  tyrannical  policy  has  been  an  unconscious  instrument  for 
accomplishing  the  work  of  freedom.  To  exchange  the  rule  of 
vigorous,  public-spirited  men  like  Sandys  and  Southampton  for 
that  of  a  narrow-minded,  pedantic  tyrant  like  James,  might  seem 
an  incalculable  loss.  But,  in  truth,  that  outburst  of  patriotic 
zeal  which  marked  the  efforts  of  the  Compaxjy  during  its  last 
four  years  could  not  have"15een  reckoned  upon  as  certain  to  last ; 
it  would  hardly  perhaps  have  shown  itself  so  decisively  but  for 
that  opposition  which  at  length  proved  fatal.  Without  some 
special  stimulus  and  an  amount  of  individual  enthusiasm  and 
self-sacrifice  which  it  was  almost  hopeless  to  expect  in  ordinary 
times,  the  Virginia  Company  would  probably  have  sunk  into  a 
cautiously-administered  corporation,  looking  on  the  colony  simply 
as  a  financial  speculation  and  with  little  sense  of  its  national  im- 
portance, b  The  case  of  the  India  Company  may  perhaps  be 
quoted  as  an  argument  against  such  a  view.  There  we  see  that 
such  a  corporation  was  able  to  rise  above  the  mere  calculations 
of  traders,  and,  recklessly  it  may  be  at  times  and  even  unscru- 
pulously, but  with  no  dread  of  responsibility  and  no  indifference 
to  lofty  aims,  to  administer  the  affairs  of  a  great  empire.  But,  in 
truth,  the  position  of  the  two  bodies  was  wholly  different.  In 
the  case  of  India  the  merchant  was  necessarily  forced  to  become 


CONCLUSION.  x83 

a  conqueror  and  a  ruler.  The  ambitious,  enterprising,  domineer- 
ing temper  of  the  Englishman  would  not  suffer  him  to  remain 
the  mere  servant  of  a  trading  company.  No  such  obligation 
would  have  been  laid  on  the  Virginia  Company.  Either  its  set- 
tlements would  have  remained  subordinate  to  trade,  little  better 
than  the  Dutch  or  Portuguese  factories  in  the  East  Indies,  or  else 
in  all  likelihood  the  responsibility  of  governing  a  growing  colony 
would  have  brought  the  Company  into  conflict  with  the  crown, 
when  the  colony  itself  would  have  been  drawn  into  the  contest 
and  its  yet  insecure  rights  would  inevitably  have  suffered.  As  it 
was,  the  colony,  happily  for  its  future,  passed  under  the  control 
of  the  crown  while  it  was  yet  plastic,,  undeveloped,  and  insignifi- 
cant. Neither  its  immediate  resources,  nor  any  promise  of  polit- 
ical greatness,  invited  attack,  till  the  day  had  passed  when  such 
an  attack  could  be  dangerous.  During  the  interval  the  neglected 
community  was  silently  maturing  its  resources,  till  the  Virginian 
planter,  with  all  his  pride  of  birth  and  oligarchical  temper,  was 
fitted  to  play  his  appointed  part  in  the  great  struggle  for  national 
freedom. 

One  lesson  stands  out  clearly  written  on  the  events  which  we 
have  surveyed.  The  sixteenth  century,  with  its  many-sided  life 
and  its  complexity  of  interests,  may  be  looked  at  from  various 
points  of  view.  Not  the  least  important  is  that  which  sees  in  it 
the  conflict  of  two  great  political  principles  whose  warfare,  in  one 
form  or  another,  will  last  as  long  as  society  endures.  On  the 
ruin  of  old  institutions  and  beliefs,  amid  that  boundless  outburst 
of  new  ideas  and  new  systems,  two  theories  of  society  struggled 
for  supremacy.  One  was  that  of  a  strong  government,  not  the 
rule  of  a  feudal  king,  bound  by  measured  responsibilities  and  lim- 
ited prerogative,  but,  in  the  Greek  sense  at  least,  of  a  tyrant, 
whose  authority,  fortified  by  the  wisdom  and  energy  of  chosen 
counselors,  should  mark  out  clearly  and  definitely  the  constitu- 
tion of  society  and  the  life  of  individuals.  Over  against  it  stood 
the  idea  of  reviving  the  free  self-governing  communities  of  the 
ancient  world.  The  Puritan  states  of  Europe  and  America, 
Geneva  and  New  England,  were  the  most  conspicuous  repre- 
sentatives of  the  latter  theory.  England  under  Tudor  rule  ap- 
proximated to  the  former,  though  the  deeply-rooted  life  of  her 
free  constitution  did  not  suffer  her  to  attain  it  fully,  even  under 
Thomas  Cromwell  and  his  master.  The  theory  of  a  benevolent 
despotism  determining  the  daily  life  of  the  citizen  and  the  social 


!g4  THE  VIRGINIA  COMPANY. 

and  industrial  development  of  the  state,  is  to  some  more  attract- 
ive than  that  free  play  of  individual  character  under  which  Eng- 
land has  grown  and  thriven  for  two  centuries.  In  Virginia  we 
see  the  two  systems  placed  side  by  side  and  fairly  tested.  If  a 
community  could  be  disciplined  into  order,  sobriety,  and  godli- 
ness, the  system  on  which  Delaware  and  Dale  governed  Virginia 
ought  to  have  succeeded.  We  have  seen  the  results.  The  ex- 
periment of  self-government  was  tried  under  no  hopeful  auspices. 
Virginia  struggled  on  disregarded  and  neglected,  till  at  length  the 
little  community  of  idlers  and  spendthrifts  grew  into  the  "  Mother 
of  Presidents,"  the  birthplace  of  Jefferson  and  Madison  and 
Washington. 


"        oF    THE 

UNIVERSITY; 


CHAPTER  VII. 

VIRGINIA    UNDER    ROYAL   GOVERNMENT.1 

Hitherto  we  have  been  dealing  with  the  history  of  colonizers 
rather  than  that  of  colonies.  Our  attention  has  been  mainly 
Change  in  directed  to  the  efforts  of  those  Englishmen  who  were 
a«ereoCfhour  laDorm&  to  wm  fresn  provinces  for  England  beyond  the 
subjed*.  Atlantic.  Now  we  must  transfer  it  to  the  occupants 
of  those  provinces.  The  time  of  colonization  in  Virginia  is  prac- 
tically past.  Henceforth  we  must  look  at  it  as  a  settled  com- 
munity, working  out  its  own  career  and  moulding  for  itself  its 
own  institutions  and  social  life.  As  far  as  the  interest  of  our  sub- 
ject goes,  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  change  is  for  the  worse.  The 
petty  personal  disputes,  and  the  narrow  objects  which  »make  up 
the  public  life  of  a  little  colony,  are  but  poor  subjects  for  history 
beside  the  self-devoted  labors  of  the  early  Virginian  explorers. 
The  history  of  a  small  community  is  not  necessarily  void  of 
interest,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  case  of  New  England.  But  that 
marvelous  political  activity,  which  makes  the  history  of  Massa- 
chusetts and  the  kindred  states  such  a  mine  of  wealth  for  the 
student  of  institutions,  has  no  place  in  Virginia.  There  the 
course  of  national  life  flowed  on  tranquilly,  while  such  changes 
as  did  occur  were  wrought  silently  and  beneath  the  surface,  and 
can  Scarcely  be  traced  save  in  their  final  effects.  Thus  the 
period  of  Virginian  history  on  which  we  are  about  to  enter  can 
be  dealt  with  on  a  scale  which  may  seem  disproportionately  small 
in  comparison  with  the  ground  which  we  have  already  traveled. 
This  is  due  alike  to  a  difference  in  the  extent  of  our  knowledge 
and  in  the  interest  and  importance  of  our  subject.     We  have 

1  The  materials  for  this  chapter  are  mainly  taken  from  the  State  Papers,  and  from  Hening's 
Statutt-s  of  Virginia.  My  references  are  to  the  edition  of  1823.  I  have  also  referred  to 
pamphlets  in  Force's  collection. 

185 


iS6  VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 

passed  as  it  were  from  broad  daylight  into  dusk.  The  doings  of 
the  Virginia  Company  are  almost  as  clearly  and  definitely  recorded 
as  the  Parliamentary  proceedings  of  our  own  day,  while  we  have 
abundant  assistance  from  letters  and  pamphlets.  The  early  his- 
tory of  the  colony  itself  has  to  be  spelled  out,  like  the  early  history 
of  most  communities,  in  no  small  measure  by  a  process  of  infer- 
ence and  conjecture.  There  is  another  reason  for  a  less  ample 
treatment  in  the  inferiority  of  personal  interest.  The  early 
Virginian  explorers  and  their  friends  and  supporters  at  home 
seem  to  stand  between  two  epochs  and  to  share  in  the  interest 
of  each.  The  great  Elizabethan  heroes  seem  to  live  again  in 
the  wisdom  of  Hakluyt  and  Sandys,  in  the  daring  of  Smith  and 
Somers.  No  like  glory  attaches  to  the  men  whose  doings  now 
come  before  us,  not  because  they  were  worse  than  their  prede- 
cessors, but  because  their  position  called  for  no  such  heroism  and 
offered  them  no  such  career. 

In  considering  the  physical  character  of  the  country  and  its 
influence  on  the  inhabitants,  one  or  two  features  stand  out  plain 
Physical  an(^  obvious.  Virginia  is  pre-eminently  a  land  of  riv- 
fitics  o?r"  ers'  a  *anc*  wni°n  everywhere  lends  itself  to  water  car- 
Virginia,  riage.  The  coast  itself  is  so  indented  with  deep  creeks 
that  the  sea-board  is  multiplied  by  something  like  five  times  the 
direct  distance  between  its  northern  and  its  southern  point.  The 
whole  country  is  so  intersected  with  rivers  and  tributary  streams 
navigable  by  small  craft,  that  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  a  place 
within  fifty  miles  of  the  coast  without  the  means  of  water  carriage 
at  six  or  seven  miles'  distance.  The  natural  result  was  that  one 
of  the  chief  motives  for  holding  together  was  lost.  The  very 
wealth  of  navigable  rivers  was  injurious  to  navigation.  No  ports 
or  shipping  stations  sprang  up,  when  every  planter  had  a  landing 
stage  close  to  his  own  door.  Nor  was  there  anything  in  the  nat- 
ure of  the  soil  or  climate,  or  in  the  temper  of  the  savage  occu- 
pants, to  forbid  unlimited  extension.  The  soil,  indeed,  invited 
it.  The  sea-coast,  along  which  the  settlers  might  most  naturally 
have  concentrated  themselves,  was  fertile,  but  swampy  and  in 
many  places  malarious.  Farther  inland,  the  undulating  ground 
and  the  alternation  of  woodland  and  rich  greensward  seemed  to 
rival  the  most  favored  districts  of  England,  while  the  abundance 
of  game  and  the  exuberant  fertility  of  the  soil  favored  that  free 
sylvan  life  which  has  ever  had  a  charm  for  Englishmen.  The  re- 
lations with  the  Indians,  too,  though  never  after  the  early  days  of 


SYSTEM  OF  LAND  TENURE.  187 

the  colony  cordial,  and  at  times  actively  hostile,  were  seldom 
such  as  to  force  the  settlers  into  union  and  cohesion. 

This  tendency  to  spread  over  the  land  was  confirmed  by  the 
dissolution  of  the  Company.  The  policy  of  that  body  had  done 
System  of  something  to  prevent  the  whole  settlement  from  pass- 
land  tenure.  mg  [ni0  t|ie  hands  of  large  planters  and  to  encourage 
a  class  of  small  proprietors,  who  would  in  time  have  been  driven 
by  the  need  of  'mutual  dependence  to  form  compact  settlements. 
Under  the  Company  there  were  two  classes  of  landholders. 
There  were  the  large  planters,  who  held  grants  of  land  propor- 
tioned to  their  contributions,  both  of  money  and  of  emigrants, 
and  who,  though  amenable  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Company, 
administered  their  estates  in  their  own  fashion.  Side  by  side  with 
these  there  was  a  class,  ultimately  intended,  as  it  would  seem,  to 
develop  into  metayer  tenants.  These  were  the  servants  of  the 
Company,  who,  in  return  for  their  labors  on  the  public  land,  re- 
ceived an  allotment  for  themselves,  and  in  course  of  time,  by 
working  out  their  period  of  service,  became  landholders,  paying 
a  rent  either  in  produce  or  labor  for  the  benefit  of  the  common 
treasury.  After  the  extinction  of. the  Company  no  formal  change 
seems  to  have  been  introduced  in  the  tenure  of  land.  As  before, 
fifty  acres  were  granted  to  every  free  emigrant  who  went  out  at 
his  own  cost,  with  fifty  more  for  every  person  whom  he  transport- 
ed. For  the  first  seven  years  all  quit  rents  were  remitted,  and 
the  only  condition  imposed  was  that  out  of  every  fifty  acres  thus 
occupied,  three  should  be  cultivated  within  the  year.1  Moreover, 
large  quantities  of  land  had  been  cleared  and  cultivated  and  af- 
terwards forsaken  by  the  Indians  ;2  and  thus  another  check  which 
in  new  countries  usually  limits  the  accumulation  of  large  estates 
was  removed. 

There  was  nothing  in  this  system  necessarily  to  prevent  the 
growth  of  a  free  yeomanry.  Practically,  however,  such  a  class 
needed  something  more  than  sufferance.  Without  encourage- 
ment they  could  not  come  into  existence,  and  that  encouragement 
was  no  longer  given.  A  community  of  small  proprietors  can 
only  exist  where  they  are  closely  grouped  together,  with  facilities 

1  Beverley,  p.  241.  The  remission  for  the  first  seven  years  is  expressly  stated  in  the  in- 
structions given  to  Lord  Culpepper,  Governor  of  Virginia  in  1681,  Col.  Entry  Bk.,  No. 
lxxxii.  p.  43. 

2  This  is  stated  in  a  pamphlet  called  Virginia  Richly  and  Tmly  Valued.  By  Edward 
Williams,  London,  1650.  This  work,  which  contains  many  interesting  details  as  to  the  ma- 
terial condition  of  the  colony,  is  published  in  Force,  vol.  iii. 


jS8  VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 

for  mutual  defense  and  for  the  interchange  of  commodities.  The 
climate,  soil  and  natural  conditions  of  Virginia,  and  the  tastes  of 
her  landed  aristocracy,  forbade  the  growth  of  such  communities, 
and  the  large  planters  became  in  course  of  time  almost  the  ex- 
clusive holders  of  land.  By  what  steps  or  in  what  time  the  smaller 
yeomanry  were  absorbed  and  disappeared  is  uncertain.  Just 
as  in  earlier  English  history  the  free  socage  tenant  often  surren- 
dered that  position  and  voluntarily  took  a  dependent  place  in  the 
feudal  chain,  so  we  may  believe  that  in  Virginia  the  small  holder 
would  find  his  position  untenable,  and  seek  security  and  society 
where  alone  it  could  be  had,  on  the  plantation  of  his  richer 
neighbor. 

James  had  already  announced  his  intention  of  remodeling  the 
government  of  Virginia  and  placing  the  colony  under  the  irarae- 
Relationsofdiate  control  of  the  crown.1  His  death  nine  months 
toethelony  a^ter  ^e  dissolution  of  the  Company  prevented  any 
crown.  steps  towards  the  fulfillment  of  this  design.  The  colony 
had  no  reason  to  regret  the  change  of  sovereign.  With  all  Charles's 
faults,  he  had  a  certain  kingliness  of  temper  and  some  dignity  of 
aim  and  purpose  which  raised  him  far  above  the  despicable  pedant 
whom  he  succeeded.  Bigot,  autocrat,  dissembler  though  he  was, 
he  did  not  lack  a  sense  of  his  duties  towards  his  subjects,  and  was 
above  sacrificing  their  interests  to  enrich  men  whom  it  was  a 
crime  to  endure.  If  James  had  lived,  the  little  wealth  which 
could  be  wrung  out  of  Virginia  would  probably  have  gone  to  re- 
ward the  vile  services  of  some  court  favorite,  while  the  task  of 
constructing  an  elaborate  constitution  for  the  colony  might  have 
served  to  vary  the  ignoble  pleasures  of  a  meddlesome  pedant. 
The  Virginia  colonists  never  crossed  Charles  either  in  his  eccle- 
siastical or  civil  policy,  and  as  a  consequence  his  dealings  with 
them  were  marked,  not  indeed  by  unswerving  fairness  or  conspic- 
uous wisdom,  but  on  the  whole  by  equity,  moderation,  and  good 
sense. 

One  of  the  first  results  of  the  change  of  sovereign  was  an  at- 
tempt on  the  part  of  the  Company  to  recover  its  privileges. 
Attempt  to  Within  a  month  of  the  king's  death  the  members  of 
Company,  the  late  Company  addressed  a  memorial  to  the  Privy 
Council,  recounting  all  the  services  which  the  Company  had  done 
to  the  colony,  and  petitioning  that  the  proceedings  of  the  late 
commission  should  be  made  null  and  a  fresh  patent  granted  with 

1  Order  of  Council,  1623,  Oct.  8.     Stith,  p.  293. 


DISTRESSED  STATE  OE  THE  COLONY.  189 

the  same  conditions  as  the  old  charter.  In  short,  they  asked  for 
a  complete  restitution  of  their  former  privileges.1 

If  any  formal  answer  was  given  to  the  memorial  it  is  no  longer 
to  be  found.  A  practical  answer,  however,  was  given  by  a  royal 
proclamation  issued  on  the  13th  of  May.2  This  may  be  looked 
on  as  the  formal  declaration  of  the  new  constitution.  It  ap- 
pointed as  before  two  Councils,  one  resident  in  England,  the  other 
in  Virginia.  Nothing  was  said  of  an  Assembly  or  any  form  of 
popular~representation.  Yet  no  design  ever  seems  to  have  been 
entertained  of  abrogating  it,  nor  do  the  colonists  seem  to  have 
felt  any  serious  fear  on  that  head.  The  most  objectionable  part 
of  the  new  constitution  was  that  it  made  all  public  servants  de- 
pendent on  the  crown,  and  thus  deprived  the  colonists  of  any 
control  over  the  public  expenditures  or  over  the  good  conduct 
of  officials.  Herein  lay  the  seed  of  an  abuse  which  ever  tended 
to  embitter  the  relations  between  the  colonists  and  the  home 
government,  and  which  had  its  share  in  bringing  about  the  final 
separation.- 

For  the  present,  however,  the  colonists  had  more  immediate 
and  pressing  subjects  of  alarm.  The  dissolution  of  the  Company 
Distressed   anc[  fts  struggle  for  revival  had  begotten  a  feeling  of 

state  of  the  bb  1,1  1  1      j 

colony.  insecurity.  The  planters  also  knew  that  a  scheme  had 
been  lately  on  foot  for  granting  a  monopoly  of  tobacco,  and  they 
felt  that  anything  which  interfered  with  that  one  sure  source  of 
income  would  be  fatal  to  the  well-being  of  the  colony.  The 
massacre,  too,  though  its  immediate  results  had  been  compara- 
tively slight,  had  driven  the  settlers  to  adopt  a  sudden  change 
of  life  and  to  concentrate  themselves  for  purposes  of  defense. 
Neglected  tillage,  scarcity  of  corn,  famine  and  sickness  were  the 
consequences.  The  evil  days  of  Percy  an^d  Ratcliffe  seemed 
to  have  returned.  Many  took  fright  ana  left  the  colony.3  Fort- 
unately there  were  a  few  men  at  the  head  of  affairs  who  did 
not  lose  heart.  The  Governor,  Sir  Francis  Wyatt,  and  certain 
leading  members  of  the  Council,  among  them  Hamor,  West, 
Clayborne,  and  Mathews,  all  either  already  conspicuous  in  Vir- 
ginian history  or  destined  soon  to  become  so,  addressed  a  series 
of  memorials  to  the  home  government,  pointing  out  the  measures 
which  were  needful  for  the  security  and  advancement  of  the  col- 
ony.4*  They  dwelt  on  the  importance  of  encouraging  other  forms 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1625.  2  lb.,  1625,  May  13.  3 lb.,  1625,  June  15. 

4  These  memorials  are  all  to  be  found  in  the  Colonial  Papers  for  1626  and  1627. 


I9o  VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 

of  industry  beside  tobacco  planting,  and  mentioned  especially 
those  which  had  been  attempted  by  the  Company,  iron-works  and 
silk-culture.  They  showed  the  necessity  for  taking  vigorous 
measures  against  the  Indians,  and  for  forming  more  compact  set- 
tlements, both  for  industrial  and  for  military  reasons.  They  spe- 
cially pointed  out  the  necessity  of  making  the  colony  a  desirable 
habitation,  and  giving  the  settlers  a  lasting  interest  in  its  well- 
being,  instead  of  allowing  them  to  regard  it  merely  as  a  temporary 
resort  for  trading  purposes.  They  petitioned  strongly  against  all 
attempts  to  fetter  the  tobacco  trade  of  the  colony  by  any  monop- 
oly or  contract.  On  the  last  named,  and  as  it  would  seem  in 
their  opinion,  the  most  important  point,  they  were  successful,  and 
we  hear  of  no  further  attempt  to  enrich  any  favored  monopolist 
at  the  expense  of  the  Virginian  tobacco  planter.  In  other  matters 
they  were  less  fortunate.  After  the  temporary  panic  of  the  mas- 
sacre had  passed  away,  the  settlers  returned  to  their  straggling 
mode  of  life.  Tobacco  still  continued  to  be  the  staple  produc- 
tion, and  as  might  be  expected  in  a  land  of  boundless  fertility, 
no  attempt  was  made  to  establish  manufactures.  But  though 
their  special  recommendations  bore  little  fruit,  it  is  scarcely  pos- 
sible to  overrate  the  value  of  the  courage  and  energy  which  the 
leading  men  of  the  colony  displayed  in  this  crisis.  The  occasion 
was  one  on  which  the  whole  future  of  the  colony  depended.  A 
lack  of  spirit  now  would  probably  have  been  fatal  to  the  rising 
fortunes  of  the  settlement.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  num- 
ber of  those  who  were  leaving  the  colony,  it  is  clear  that  a  feeling 
of  despondency  was  abroad,  and  the  action  of  Wyatt  and  his 
supporters  must  have  served  to  inspire  the  colonists  with  that 
hopeful  and  self-reliant  temper  which  was  needed  to  surmount 
their  difficulties. 

The  crisis  passed  over.  The  Indians  ceased  to  be  a  source  of 
pressing  fear,  and  the  colony  no  longer  seemed  in  danger  either 
improved  °f  extinction  or  desertion.  If  it  be  true  that  happy 
of'th?00  *s  ^e  count:ry  which  has  no  history,  the  next  ten  years 
colony.  may  be  reckoned  prosperous  ones  for  Virginia.  The 
change  of  Governors  seems  to  have  had  no  marked  influence  on 
the  fortunes -of  the  colony.  ,  In  1626  Wyatt  was  succeeded  by 
Yeardley.  Though  apparently  a  man  of  no  great  wisdom  or 
vigor,  his  name  was  honorably  associated  with  the  early  days  of 
freedom  and  self-government.  That  he  commanded  the  confi- 
dence alike  of  Wyatt  and  the  leading  settlers,  is  shown  by  the 


DEALINGS  WITH  THE  INDIANS.  I9I 

fact  that  he  had  been  elected  as  a  deputy  to  lay  their  views  be- 
fore the  English  government  immediately  after  the  dissolution  of 
the  Company.1  In  1627  Yeardley  died,  and  in  the  following 
year  Harvey  became  Governor.  His  Virginian  career  was  neither 
a  prosperous  nor  an  honorable  one.  His  letters,  of  which  many 
remain,  and  the  references  to  him  in  contemporary  documents 
give  us  ample  material  for  judging  of  his  character.  They  pre- 
sent him  to  us  as  a  weak,  commonplace  man,  with  no  strongly 
marked  features,  either  of  good  or  evil ;  not  without  shrewdness 
in  perceiving  what  was  for  the  welfare  of  the  colony,  but  with  a 
yet  quicker  eye  to  his  own  interest ;  arbitrary  to  inferiors,  yet  an 
obsequious  courtier,  and  with  that  lack  of  political  morality 
which,  save  for  a  few  honorable  exceptions,  distinguished  the 
court  party  in  that  age.  At  an  earlier  day  such  a  ruler  might 
have  been  fatal  to  the  colony.  Happily  Virginia  had  outgrown 
the  stage  in  which  she  could  be  made  or  marred  by  the  vigor  or 
folly  of  a  single  man. 

In  the  even  flow  of  events  during  the  ten  years  which  followed 
Dealings      the  dissolution  of  the  Company,  two  subjects  of  inter- 

with  the  ,  •  , 

Indians.       est  and  importance  stand  out  prominent. 

The* first  of  these  was  the  relation  of  the  colony  to  its  savage 
neighbors.  When  the  troubles  which  followed  the  massacre  were 
at  an  end,  we  hear  of  no  disturbance  for  a  while.  This  may  be 
in  part  due  to  the  fact  that  the  leading  men  were  too  fully  occu- 
pied with  the  dissolution  of  the  Company  and  its  consequences 
to  trouble  themselves  about  anything  which  did  not  threaten  im- 
mediate danger.  In  1632  it  was  necessary  to  pass  an  Act  em- 
powering the  colonies  to  defend  themselves  in  urgent  cases,  with- 
out reference  either  to  the  legislative  or  the  executive  power.2 
In  the  same  year  another  Act  reaffirmed  the  policy  of  Dale,  and 
forbade  all  private  trade  with  the  savages.3  Two  years  later  this 
enactment  was  reaffirmed  at  greater  length,  and  with  specific 
penalties.4 

Throughout  the  whole  of  her  history,  with  a  few  rare  and  un- 
important exceptions,  the  policy  of  Virginia  towards  the  Indians 
was  marked  with  singular  wisdom  and  justice,  and  might  well 
serve  as  an  ensample  to  more  highly-educated  communities. 
The  rights  of  the  natives  were  respected,  while  at  the  same  time 
there  never  was  any  lack  of  firmness  in  restraining  and  punishing 
their  misdeeds.     Throughout,  the  colonists  aimed,  and  for  the 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1625,  June  15.        2  Hening,  i.  p.  176.        »  lb.,  p.  173.         4  lb.,  p.  219. 


ig2  VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 

most  part  successfully,  at  avoiding  all  occasions  for  conflict, 
whether  proceeding  from  the  ambitious  and  rapacious  policy  of 
the  state,  from  the  unjust  aggression  of  individuals,  or  from  ill- 
judging  benevolence.  No  lesson  is  more  plainly  written  in  his- 
tory than  this,  that  all  close  intercourse  between  a  highly-civilized 
race  and  a  thoroughly  barbarous  one  is  almost  sure  to  end  in  the 
oppression  of  one  and  the  demoralization  of  both.  To  have  as 
few  dealings  as  possible,  and  be  sure  that  these  dealings  are 
based  on  principles  of  justice,  is  the  only  wise  policy  for  a  civil- 
ized race,  and  this  was  throughout  the  policy  of  Virginia. 

The  other  question  which  exercised  the  wisdom  of  the  Virginian 
legislature  was  the  production  and  exportation  of  tobacco.  We 
Legislation  nave  already  seen  how  this  threatened  to  absorb  the 
tobacco  entire  energies  of  the  colonists,  and  to  interfere  with  all 
culture.  other  forms  of  industry,  and  how  anxiously  those  who 
wished  well  to  the  colony  had  viewed  this  danger.  The  cause 
of  the  mischief,  in  truth,  lay  too  deep  for  legislation  to  reach  it. 
If  the  supply  of  land  had  been  limited,  the  need  for  a  change  of 
crops  and  the  dread  of  exhausting  the  soil  would  of  itself  have 
restrained  the  production  of  tobacco.  But  the  boundless  extent 
of  fertile  territory,  and  the  easy  terms  on  which  it  might  be  ac- 
quired, allowed  the  planter  to  rack  out  his  ground  with  tobacco, 
and  then  to  proceed  to  virgin  soil,  leaving  that  which  was  ex- 
hausted to  recover  itself.  Moreover,  though  the  Virginian  laborer 
was  not  a  slave  for  life,  he  was  one  for  the  time  being;  and  slave 
labor  is  far  better  fitted  for  the  monotonous  task  of  producing  a 
single  crop  than  for  a  varied  husbandry,  which,  especially  in  a 
new  country,  requires  some  skill  and  versatility.  Nor  were  there 
any  districts  which,  by  enjoying  special  facilities  for  carriage, 
tended  to  put  less  favored  plantations  at  a  disadvantage.  Every 
planter  had  equal  opportunities  of  water  carriage,  and  thus  what 
might  have  been  a  natural  and  wholesome  check  on  the  produc- 
tion of  tobacco  was  absent.  It  was  but  reasonable  that  this 
staple  product  should  have  been  looked  upon  with  some  distrust. 
We  know  now  that  tobacco,  though  not  strictly  a  necessary  of 
life,  is  one  of  those  articles  whose  consumption  may  be  looked  on 
as  certain  and  permanent.  In  the  seventeenth  century  men 
could  hardly  be  blamed  if  they  regarded  the  use  of  tobacco  as  a 
precarious  fashion.  It  was  felt  too,  and  with  reason,  that  it  was 
dangerous  for  Virginia  to  depend  for  the  necessities  of  life  on  her 
import  trade,  and  on  the  fickle  good-will  of  her  savage  neighbors. 


EXCESSIVE  PRODUCTION  OF  TOBACCO.  ^3 

The  doctrine  that  each  country  should  produce  what  it  is  best 
fitted  for,  and  that  the  inhabitants  may  be  trusted  to  discover 
that  for  themselves,  is  a  thoroughly  sound  doctrine  as  applied  to 
settled  communities,  where  both  capital  and  enterprise  are  abun- 
dant ;  but  it  does  not  apply  to  a  new  country  where  forms  of 
industry,  which  may  in  time  become  profitable,  or  needful  to  the 
independence  of  the  community,  must  often  at  the  outset  be 
guarded  and  nursed  into  life. 

There  were  other  reasons,  too,  political  rather  than  econom- 
ical, which  made  it  specially  dangerous  for  the  colonists  to  build 
their  prosperity  on  this  one  product.  The  Virginian  tobacco 
trade  might  almost  be  said  to  exist  by  sufferance.  If  the  planter 
was  to  have  a  profitable  market  in  England,  he  must  be  in  some 
measure  protected  against  his  Spanish  rival,  and  the  English 
grower  must  be  wholly  excluded.  Thus  the  colonial  tobacco 
trade  depended  both  on  the  favor  of  the  court  and  on  the  foreign 
policy  of  the  home  government.  There  was,  too,  the  danger, 
and,  as  the  last  reign  had  shown,  a  very  real  danger,  of  being 
sacrificed  to  some  greedy  monopolist,  or  being  loaded  with  an 
excessive  duty  to  replenish  the  royal  exchequer.  Accordingly,  it 
was  in  no  spirit  of  undue  interference  or  protection  that  the 
legislature  of  Virginia  made  constant  efforts  to  limit  the  produc- 
tion of  tobacco,  and  to  urge  the  colonists  to  other  forms  of  in- 
dustry. 

As  early  as  16 19  Yeardley  had  endeavored  to  check  this  evil 
by  proclamation.  In  1623  it  had  become  an  established  custom 
among  the  planters  to  make  their  contracts  and  to  keep  their 
accounts  in  tobacco  instead  of  money.1  Owing  to  the  fluctu- 
ations in  value  this  was  found  inconvenient,  and  in  1633  a  law 
was  passed  enforcing  cash  payment.2  Notwithstanding  this 
attempt,  the  lack  of  specie  brought  society  back  to  a  system  of 
barter,  and  tobacco  became  ultimately  the  recognized  currency 
of  Virginia.  Other  attempts  were  made,  as  we  have  seen,  to 
limit  tobacco-planting  by  establishing  rival  industries,  and  pro- 
ducing cotton,  silk,  and  iron.  Whatever  promise  of  success 
might  have  attached  to  these  attempts  was  overthrown  by  the 
dissolution  of  the  Company.  Not  long  after  that  event,  direct 
measures  were  taken  to  restrain  the  planting  of  tobacco.     In 

1  In  the  proceedings  of  1623  (Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  122),  all  contracts  and  dues  are  estimated 
in  tobacco  instead  of  money. 
1  Eleoiug,  vol.  i.  p.  216. 

13 


I94  VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 

1629  an  Act  was  passed  by  which  new-comers  were  forbidden  to 
grow  this  crop  at  all,  while  every  planter  was  definitely  limited  to 
two  thousand  plants,  a  restriction  which  was  not  to  be  evaded 
by  growing  slips  or  a  second  crop.1  To  enforce  this  inspectors 
were  appointed,  and  delinquents  were  debarred  from  further  cul- 
tivation. This  system  of  limitation,  however,  was  not  considered 
wholly  satisfactory.  Owing  to  differences  of  soil  two  thousand 
plants  did  not  represent  the  same  amount  of  produce  in  every 
locality.  Moreover,  the  planter  was  tempted  to  increase  his 
quantity  by  growing  too  many  leaves  on  each  plant  or  by  culti- 
vating inferior  sorts,  and  thus  to  lower  the  general  character  of 
Virginian  tobacco.2  In  spite  of  these  complaints  we  may  sup- 
pose that  the  system  was  found  on  the  whole  successful,  inasmuch 
as  it  was  carried  still  further  four  years  later  by  an  enactment 
limiting  each  planter  to  fifteen  hundred  plants.3  At  the  same 
time  the  cultivation  of  certain  inferior  sorts  was  altogether  pro- 
hibited. These  provisions  were  enforced  by  the  establishment  of 
a  system  of  inspection  with  seven  public  warehouses.4  The  effect 
of  this  must  have  been  to  drive  the  occupants  of  certain  inferior 
soils  out  of  the  market  altogether,  to  the  temporary  injury  of 
individuals,  but  to  the  ultimate  gain  of  the  community.  These 
were  not  the  only  legislative  restrictions  imposed  on  the  tobacco- 
grower.  The  statesmen  of  the  seventeenth  century  were  for  the 
most  part  still  in  bondage  to  the  idea  that  prices  must  be  artificially 
restricted  by  law.  In  1631  the  Virginian  legislature,  acting  on 
this  principle,  fixed  sixpence  a  pound  as  the  price  of  tobacco.5 
Two  years  later,  when  the  whole  question  of  the  tobacco  laws 
was  reopened,  the  price  was  raised  to  ninepence.6  In  1639  a 
still  further  limitation  was  introduced,  and  it  was  resolved  to  copy 
the  policy  of  the  Dutch  spice-growers  and  to  enhance  the  value 
of  the  crop  by  destroying  half  of  it.7  We  may  suppose  that  the 
settlers  were  satisfied  with  the  result  of  this  legislation,  as  the 
question  was  now  suffered  to  slumber  for  twenty-three  years. 

Not  for  a  long  while  do  we  find  any  trace  of  party  politics,  or 
of  anything  like  systematic  opposition  to  government.  But  with- 
Disputes  out  these  the  Virginian  colonists  showed  that  they  had 
Governor  no  lack  of  independence  or  of  that  spirit  by  which  the 
andthe  political  life  of  a  young  state  is  fashioned  and  animated, 
settlers.       ^  js  usuanv  tne  case  in  a  newly-formed  community, 

1  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  141.  2  lb.,  vol.  i.  pp.  164,  188.  3  lb.,  p.  205. 

4  lb.,  p.  210.  8  lb.,  p.  162.  6  lb.,  p.  210.  7  lb.,  p.  225. 


DIFFICULTIES  WITH  GOVERNOR  HARVEY.  19- 

the  earliest  disputes  turned  on  personal  issues.  I  have  already 
spoken  of  the  character  of  Harvey,  a  character  which  made  it 
likely  that  he  would  before  long  find  himself  embroiled  with  the 
settlers.  At  the  very  outset  of  his  career  he  came  into  conflict 
with  a  leading  planter,  Dr.  John  Pott.  During  the  interregnum 
between  Yeardley's  departure  and  Harvey's  arrival,  Pott  had  been 
elected  by  the  council  to  act  as  Deputy-Governor.  Immediately 
on  Harvey's  landing  Pott  was  charged  with  various  crimes.  The 
chief  of  them  was  having  pardoned  a  murderer,  apparently  for  a 
corrupt  motive.  Besides  this  official  misconduct,  he  was  accused 
of  having  stolen  other  men's  hogs  and  cattle.  The  petty  scale  of 
colonial  politics  is  quaintly  illustrated  by  the  fact  that  he  was  the 
only  physician  who  understood  the  diseases  peculiar  to  the  colony. 
Accordingly  after  a  protracted  dispute  he  was  released,  mainly, 
it  would  seem,  Til  consideration  of  his  utility.1 

A  dispute  of  this  kind  was  an  unfavorable  opening  to  Harvey's 
career.  A  far  more  serious  conflict,  however,  was  at  hand.  In 
October,  1629,  during  the  Deputy-Governorship  of  Pott,  George 
Calvert,  Lord  Baltimore,  had  made  an  attempt  to  settle  in  Vir- 
ginia. He  and  his  followers,  as  being  Papists,  refused  to  take  the 
oaths  of  allegiance  and  supremacy,  and  were  accordingly  not  al- 
lowed to  stay  in  the  colony.2  In  the  next  year  Lord  Baltimore 
died  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Cecilius.  He  obtained  from  / 
Charles  a  grant  of  territory  forming  the  colony  of  Maryland.  / 
The  whole  question  of  this  grant,  of  the  American  career  of  the 
two  Calverts,  and  of  their  disputes  with  Virginia,  will  come  be- 
fore us  more  fully  hereafter.  For  the  present  we  may  confine 
ourselves  to  that  side  of  the  question  which  touches  the  history  of 
Virginia.  The  territory  granted  to  Calvert,  though  it  did  not  en- 
croach upon  that  actually  inhabited  by  the  Virginians,  included 
a  portion  of  that  which  lay  within  the  bounds  of  the  original  Vir- 
ginian patent.  This  difficulty  is  only  the  first  of  a  whole  series 
that  we  shall  meet  with,  having  their  origin  in  the  reckless  pro- 
fusion and  disregard  of  geographical  accuracy  with  which  terri- 
tory in  the  New  World  was  granted.  This  dispute,  naturally 
enough,  bred  ill  blood  between  Baltimore  and  the  Virginians. 
We  can  easily  see  how  this  might  be  without  moral  blame  at- 
taching to  either  party.  The  Virginians  had  certainly  no  claim 
on  the  forbearance  of  Baltimore,  and  without  imputing  to  him  a 

1  For  this  dispute  with  Pott  see  Colonial  Papers,  1630,  May  29  and  July  16. 
2  Colonial  Papers,  1629,  November  30. 


196 


VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 


specially  vindictive  temper,  we  may  suppose  that  he  would  feel 
some  satisfaction  in  maintaining  his  legal  rights  at  the  expense 
of  the  men  who  had  banished  his  father  from  among  them.  The 
king  and  those  who  sympathized  with  Baltimore  might  reason- 
ably feel  that  a  tract  of  fertile  land  had  better  be  in  the  hands  of 
an  active  and  intelligent  colonizer  than  be  kept  empty  by  an  un- 
employed claim.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Virginians  might  well 
think  that  their  right  was  a  moral  as  well  as  a  legal  one.  They 
might  reasonably  dislike  the  prospect  of  a  colony  on  their  borders 
differing  from  them  in  religion  and  wholly  independent  of  them 
in  politics,  commerce,  industry,  and,  above  all,  in  dealings  with 
the  savages.  Accordingly,  in  order,  as  it  would  seem,  to  be  in  a 
better  position  to  assert  their  territorial  rights,  the  Virginian  As- 
sembly sent  a  surveyor,  William  Clayborne,  to  take  possession  of 
a  part  of  the  disputed  territory,  the  Isle  of  Kent,  to  which  they 
claimed  a  title,  not  only  by  royal  grant,  but  by  purchase  from  the 
Indians.1  The  hostilities  to  which  this  measure  led  will  be  best 
treated  of  in  the  history  of  Maryland,  since  they  are  intimately 
connected  with  that  State.  For  the  present  it  is  enough  to  con- 
sider them  as  they  bore  on  the  relations  of  Harvey  and  the  Vir- 
ginians. That  Harvey  should  have  sympathized  with  Baltimore 
was  but  natural.  The  Governor  was  openly  and  avowedly  a 
courtier,  and  Baltimore  was  acting  under  the  special  favor  and 
approval  of  the  court.  What  was  the  precise  nature  and  extent 
of  Harvey's  services  to  the  Maryland  settlers  does  not  appear.  At 
least  they  were  such  as  to  earn  the  special  thanks  of  the  king, 
with  a  request  that  he  would  continue  his  assistance  against  Clay- 
borne.2  What  seemed  to  the  king  and  Privy  Council  good  and 
loyal  service,  was  in  the  eyes  of  the  Virginians,  treachery  to  the 
colony.  So  far  from  showing  any  sympathy  with  Baltimore,  the 
members  of*  the  Council  openly  denounced  him  and  his  planta- 
tion at  their  meetings,  and  declared  that  they  would  rather  knock 
their  cattle  on  the  head  than  sell  them  into  Maryland.3  There 
were  other  circumstances  which  imbittered  the  Virginians  against 
their  Governor.  A  certain  Captain  Young  had  been  sent  to  Vir- 
ginia by  the  king  on  an  errand  of  which  it  is  impossible  to  dis- 
cover the  nature.4    The  colonists  probably  looked  with  suspicion 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1634,  March  14. 

*  Letters  from  Baltimore  to  Secretary  Windebank,  and  from  Windebank  to  Harvey,  Co- 
lonial Papers,  1634,  September  15  and  18. 

3  Harvey  to  Windebank,  Colonial  Papers,  1634,  December  16. 

4  The  original  commission  to  Young  (Colonial  Papers,  1633,  September  23)  empowers  him 
£0  discover  places  not  yet  inhabited  in  Virginia  and  other  parts  of  America. 


INS URRE C TION  A GA INS T  HARVEY.  jgj 

on  this  somewhat  mysterious  emissary.  Whatever  his  object  was, 
it  led  him  to  build  two  shallops  in  Virginia  before  resuming  his 
voyage.  One  of  the  leading  colonists,  Mathews,  who  seems  to 
have  been  a  somewhat  hot-headed  man,  unfriendly  to  the  Gov- 
ernor and  suspicious  of  royal  interference  in  any  form,  accused 
Young  of  having  illegally  impressed  a  ship's  carpenter.1  In  the 
quarrel  which  ensued,  Harvey  took  the  part  of  Young.2  Noth- 
ing came  of  the  matter,  but  the  episode  illustrates  the  relations 
between  the  Governor  and  the  settlers,  and  probably  had  its  share 
in  imbittering  the  dispute  which  followed.  Another  charge 
brought  against  Harvey  was  that  he  had  asserted  his  own  right 
as  the  representative  of  the  crown  to  put  his  veto  on  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  Assembly.3 

In  April,  1635,  the  ill  feeling  against  the  Governor  came  openly 
to  a  head.  A  meeting  of  the  Council  was  held,  at  which  the 
ttoi^agafnst  P°Pu^ar  Part3rj  under  Mathews,  seems  to  have  come 
Harvey .•»  prepared  for  hostilities,  if,  at  least,  it  be  true  that  the 
leaders  were  armed,  and  that  they  had  forty  musketeers  in  readi- 
ness. Harvey  seems  to  have  opened  the  attack  by  threatening 
to  arrest  Minifie,  in  reality  one  of  the  least  decided  of  his  oppo- 
nents, for  high  treason,  on  the  ground  of  some  language  which 
he  had  used  on  a  previous  occasion.  Mathews  thereupon  retorted 
the  charge  of  treason ;  at  a  signal  from  one  of  the  ring-leaders, 
the  musketeers  marched  up,  and  Harvey  was  arrested  and  sent 
off  to  England,  apparently  in  honorable  confinement. 

We  can  hardly  suppose  that  the  insurgents  really  expected  the 
English  government  to  support  them  against  Harvey.  If  the 
attack  upon  him  was  anything  more  than  an  outburst  of  passion, 
it  must  have  been  meant  to  intimidate  Harvey,  possibly  to  deter 

1  Young's  own  version  of  the  story  is  told  in  a  statement  signed  by  him  and  three  witnesses, 
who  profess  to  have  been  present  at  the  dispute.     Colonial  Papers,  1634,  July  10. 

2  Windebank  to  Harvey,  Colonial  Papers,  1635,  May  22. 

8  Letter  from  Mathews  to  Sir  John  Wolstenholme  (Colonial  Papers,  1635,  May  25).  Ac- 
cording to  this,  Harvey  told  the  council  that  "  they  were  to  give  their  attendance  as  assist- 
ants only  to  advise  with  him  which  it  liked  should  pass,  otherwise  the  power  lay  in  himself  to 
dispose  of  all  matters  as  his  Majesty's  substitute." 

4  Our  knowledge  of  the  deposition  of  Harvey  is  derived :  1.  From  a  letter  from  Zouch,  a 
colonist,  to  his  father,  Sir  John  Zouch.  This  letter  was  kindly  shown  to  me  by  Mr.  Sains- 
bury.  By  some  accident  it  was  omitted  from  his  calendar.  2.  A  letter  from  Kemp,  the 
Secretary  for  Virginia,  to  the  Lords  Commissioners  for  Plantations,  Colonial  Papers,  1635, 
May  17.  3.  A  letter  from  Mathews  to  Sir  John  Wolstenholme,  Colonial  Papers,  1635,  May 
25.  4.  Harvey's  own  statements  in  a  letter  to  Windebank,  and  in  his  formal  declaration  to 
the  Commissioners.     {Colonial Papers,  1635,  April  3,  July  14,  and  July.) 

We  have  no  formal  statement  of  the  case  against  Harvey,  but  no  doubt  the  letters  of  Zouch 
and  Mathews  practically  embody  all  that  could  be  said  against  him. 


f 


I98  VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 

him  from  returning  to  the  colony,  and  to  act  as  a  warning  to 
future  governors.  In  the  first  part  of  this  design  the  settlers 
failed.  Harvey  returned  after  a  year,  supported,  though  in  no 
very  enthusiastic  fashion,  by  the  home  government.1  For  four 
years  longer  he  remained  Governor  of  the  colony,  sending  home 
querulous  and  petulant  accounts  of  his  grievances,  but  not  en- 
gaged in  any  open  dispute  with  the  settlers. 

We  find  but  scanty  traces  of  the  proceedings  of  the  govern- 
ment against  the  insurgents.  After  a  delay  of  nearly  five  years, 
four  of  the  chief  offenders  were  sent  home  to  be  tried  before  the 
Star  Chamber.  There  is  no  definite  record  of  the  result,  but  it 
seems  probable  that  they  suffered  nothing  beyond  the  annoyance 
of  a  compulsory  journey  to  England,  and  a  temporary  detention 
there.2  The  most  prominent  of  them,  Mathews,  was  acting  as 
agent  for  the  colony  in  England  in  1653,3  and  continued  for 
many  years  to  play  a  prominent  and  influential  part  in  Virginian 
politics. 

During  this  struggle  the  system  of  colonial  government  had 
undergone  an  alteration.  Hitherto  the  colonies  had  been  under 
Appoint-      the  direct  control  of  the  crown.      Now,  without  any 

ment  of  '  J 

special  relaxation  in  the  authority  of  the  crown,  a  change  was 
sioners  for  introduced.  Twelve  Commissioners  were  appointed 
nies.*  for  the  government  of  the  colonies,  with  power  to  ap- 

point and  remove  officials,  to  hear  complaints  and  to  supervise 
all  charters  and  patents.  Amongst  the  Commissioners  were  the 
two  Archbishops,  the  Lord  Keeper,  and  the  Lord  Treasurer. 
Practically  the  change  was  of  little  moment  to  Virginia.  Yet  it 
is  important  as  marking  the  beginning  of  a  system  continued  un- 
der the  Commonwealth,  and  further  developed  at  the  Restora- 
tion, by  which  the  colonies  were  constituted  a  distinct  and  sepa- 
rate department  of  the  state  organization. 

Soon  after  the  dispute  with  Harvey  the  political  tranquillity  of 
the  colony  was  disturbed  by  another  cause.  More  than  once 
since  the  dissolution  of  the  Company,  there  had  been  faint  rumors 

1  We  may  infer  this,  I  think,  from  the  leniency  shown  to  his  enemies. 

*  An  order  from  the  Privy  Council  to  the  Governor  and  Council  of  Virginia  (Colonial  Pa- 
pers, 1637,  May  25)  requires  them  to  take  effectual  order  that  the  goods  of  the  prisoners 
(West,  Mathews,  Utie,  and  Peirce)  should  be  left  under  the  charge  of  those  to  whom  they 
had  been  entrusted  by  the  owners,  and  that  anything  which  had  been  seized  should  be  re- 
turned. 

■  His  name  appears  at  the  head  of  a  list  of  signatures  to  a  petition  of  merchant*.  tra«HFhg 
to  Virginia  and  other  plantations.     (Colonial Papers,  1653,  May  z8-) 

4  Colonial  Papers,  1634,  April  28. 


ATTEMPT  TO  RESTORE  THE  COMPANY.  I99 

of  an  attempt  to  restore  it.  At  one  time,  indeed,  this  seemed  in 
a  fair  way  to  be  carried  out.  In  1631  a  special  commission, 
Atteore'the  aPP°inted  to  report  on  the  condition  and  government 
Company,  of  Virginia,  gave  their  opinion  in  favor  of  re-incor- 
porating the  Company.1  The  settlers  at  once  took  fright.  There 
is  nothing  inconsistent  in  their  support  of  the  Company  against 
the  attacks  of  James  and  their  hostility  to  its  renewal.  Rather 
they  proceeded  from  the  same  cause,  from  a  dread  of  the  confu- 
sion and  uncertainty  with  which  each  change  threatened  the  col- 
ony. '  Security  of  title  was  absolutely  essential  to  the  prosperity 
of  the  young  community,  and  who  could  tell  what  claims  might 
be  revived  if  the  Company  again  came  into  existence  ?  More- 
over, the  restoration  of  the  Company  would  almost  inevitably 
involve  some  interference  with  that  political  freedom  and  that 
self-government  which  now  seemed  to  have  taken  firm  root  in  the 
colony.  We  need  not  wonder  if  the  settlers,  in  their  anxiety  to 
meet  the  danger,  were  somewhat  regardless  of  consistency,  and 
departed  from  that  point  of  view  concerning  the  utility  and  good 
administration  of  the  Company  which  they  »had  upheld  a  few 
years  earlier.  That  they  did  so  is  certain,  if  we  are  justified  in 
attributing  to  them  a  memorial  pointing  out  the  evils  which  would 
result  from  the  change.2  This  document  reminded  the  king  how 
the  old  corporation  had  used  its  meetings  as  "  private  conventi- 
cles," in  which  to  debate  the  affairs-of-state,  and  to  criticise  the 
policy  of  the  court.  With  more  justice  it  pointed  out  the  unfair- 
ness of  making  such  a  change  without  consulting  the  Governor 
and  the  leading  settlers,  and  appealed  to  the  prosperity  which 
the  colony  enjoyed  as  the  best  plea  for  the  present  system.  Fin- 
ally, it  sought  to  enlist  the  self-interest  of  the  king,  by  reminding 
him  of  the  loss  of  future  emoluments  which  he  would  undergo  by 
making  over  the  quit-rents  of  Virginia  to  the  Company.  In 
spite  of  these  arguments  a  charter  seems  actually  to  have  been 
drafted  and  accepted  by  the  members  of  the  old  Company,  and 
an  instruction  was  given  to  the  Attorney- General  that  in  all  grants 
of  territory  he  should  respect  their  rights.3  Here,  however,  the 
matter  seems  to  have  abruptly  ended,  and  for  seven  years  no 
further  step  was  taken  towards  calling  the  Company  into  ex- 
istence. 

In  1639,  however,  the  colonists  became  again  apprehensive  of  • 
such  an  attempt.     To  meet  it  they  sent  an  agenttoEngland  with     ^ 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1631,  November.  2  lb.  3  lb.,  1632,  March  2. 


200  VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 

instructions  to  oppose  the  threatened  change.  Their  choice  fell 
on  George  Sandys,  a  brother  of  that  Sir  Edwin  Sandys  whose 
Sandys's  courageous  and  self-sacrificing  efforts  on  behalf  of  the 
ft|ecoCnse-nd  c°l°ny  nave  been  already  recorded.  The  choice  seems  a 
quences.i  strange,  and  proved  an  unhappy  one.  Sandys,  as  might 
be  supposed,  was  an  ally  and  friend  of  Ferrar,  and  all  his  inter- 
ests were  naturally  identified  with  those  of  the  old  Company. 
We  may  suppose  that  he  was  a  man  of  somewhat  elastic  sympa- 
thies, since  in  1631  we  find  him  petitioning  the  king  to  appoint 
him  secretary  to  a  committee  of  the  Privy  Council  who  were  to 
settle  the  affairs  of  Virginia.2  It  seems  somewhat  strange  that 
the  Assembly  should  have  chosen  for  its  representative  a  man 
whose  earliest  associations  connected  him  with  that  very  corpora- 
tion which  it  was  now  their  object  to  withstand,  and  whose  latter 
conduct  showed,  to  say  the  least  of  it,  a  somewhat  supple  and 
courtier-like  spirit.  Possibly,  it  was  that  very  fact  which  led  them 
to  select  him  as  likely  to  be  acceptable  to  the  king.  Whatever 
were  the  motives  for  the  choice,  it  proved  a  bad  one.'  The  charge 
subsequently  brought  against  Sandys  was,  as  it  stands  recorded, 
hardly  credible.  We  are  told  that  in  unblushing  defiance  of  his 
instructions  and  the  wishes  of  his  clients,  he  petitioned  the  king 
in  the  name  of  the  Virginia  planters  for  the  restoration  of  the 
Company.  There  may  perhaps  have  been  in  the  colony  a  mi- 
nority who  held  such  a  view,  though  no  other  trace  of  their  ex- 
istence appears.  But  it  is  at  least  certain  that  Sandys  could 
make  no  pretense  to  represent  the  opinions  of  the  majority  of  the 
Assembly. 

As  soon  as  the  Assembly  heard  of  their  agent's  treachery,  they 
at  once  took  measures  to  counteract  it.  -  A  declaration  was  drawn 
of  theedings  UP  anc*  can"ied,  disclaiming  Sandys's  conduct,  and  stat- 
Assembiy.  mg  that  he  had  misunderstood  his  instructions.  It 
furthermore  set  forth  all  the  old  arguments  against  the  Company; 
the  interference  with  free  trade  and  individual  enterprise  which 
the  restoration  of  it  would  cause;  the  unfitness  of  a  commercial 
corporation  to  govern  a  distant  colony,  and  the  confusion  which 
would  result  from  the  removal  of  old  titles.  Finally,  it  enacted 
that  any  person  who  should  hereafter  propose  either  the  restora- 

1  The  whole  of  this  strange  transaction  is  related  in  a  pamphlet  published  in  Force,  vol.  ii. 
It  is  entitled  An  Extract  from  a  Manuscript  Collection  of  Annals  relative  to  Virginia.  It 
seems  to  have  been  originally  printed  at  the  time  of  the  Stamp  Act  dispute  to  stimulate  the 
feeling  of  independence. 

2  Colonial  Papers,  1631. 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  THE  COLONISTS.  2oi 

tion  of  the  Company  or  the  establishment  of  any  monopoly  or 
contract,  should  be  reckoned  a  public  enemy  and  his  estates  for- 
feited. This  remonstrance  was  forwarded  to  the  king.  At  the 
same  time  a  document  containing  the  substance  of  the  remon- 
strance was  circulated  through  the  colony.1  The  address  was 
favorably  received  by  the  king,  and  was  answered  by  him  in  a 
letter  stating,  that  while  before  he  had  no  intention  of  restoring 
the  Company,  he  was  now  even  more  confirmed  in  that  view  by 
the  representations  of  the  Virginian  government.2 

The  whole  proceeding  may  be  looked  upon  as  indicating  the 
amount  of  importance  and  independence  which  the  colonial  gov- 
ernment had  been  silently  and  gradually  acquiring.  It  was  fortun- 
ate, too,  that  the  first  measure  of  self-assertion  was  one  which, 
instead  of  bringing  the  settlers  into  conflict  with  the  authority  of 
the  crown,  rather  declared  and  confirmed  their  acceptance  of  it, 
and  that  thus  any  struggle  with  the  home  government  was  deferred 
till  the  growing  energies  and  resources  of  the  colony  could  bet- 
ter bear  such  a  strain. 

We  may  now  fitly  pause  and  review  the  progress  which  the 
colony  had  made  in  the  period  during  which  it  had  enjoyed  so 
^ewofthe  ^ar&e  a  snare  of  independence  and  self-government, 
condition  In  a  colony,  increase  of  population  is  at  once  a  cause 
colony.  and  a  test  of  prosperity,  and  if  we  measure  the  con- 
dition of  Virginia  by  this,  we  can  have  little  doubt  of  its  flourish- 
ing condition.  Fortunately  the  number  of  inhabitants  at  certain 
tolerably  regular  intervals  is  precisely  recorded,  and  the  uniform- 
ity of  the  progress  raises  a  strong  presumption  of  the  accuracy  . 
of  the  statements.  By  1628  the  loss  caused  by  the  massacre,  and 
still  more  by  the  subsequent  confusion  and  panic,  had  not  been 
replaced,  and  the  population  was  under  three  thousand.3  The 
next  two  years  showed  no  great  increase.4  Four  years  later  the 
tide  had  turned.  One  year  alone  brought  more  than  a  thousand  A, 
new-comers,6  and  by  1635  an  official  census  returned  close  upon 
five  thousand  inhabitants.6  In  the  spring  of  the  same  year,  we 
find  Mathews  stating  that  two  thousand  immigrants  had  arrived 
in  that  year,  and  this  influx  was  followed  by  sixteen  hundred  in 

1  These  two  documents  are  published  in  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  230.  They  are  taken  from  a 
collection  of  manuscripts  belonging  to  Thomas  Jefferson.  It  is  not  unlikely  that  the  account 
published  by  Force  came  from  the  same  quarter. 

2  Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  lxxix.  p.  237. 

8  Colonial  Papers,  1628,  March  26.  4  lb.,  1629,  August,  1630,  May  29. 

*  lb.,  1634,  February  8.  6  lb.,  1635,  April. 


202  VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 

the  next.1  There  is,  however,  a  significant  remark  in  a  lettei 
from  Richard  Kemp,  the  Secretary  to  the  Council,  which  would 
seem  to  show  that  this  increase  did  not  really  prove  a  propor- 
tionate advance  in  prosperity.  Writing  in  1638,  he  states  that  of 
hundreds  who  arrive  every  year,  scarcely  any  come  but  those 
"who  are  brought  in  as  merchandise  to  make  sale  of."2  In 
other  words,  the  bulk  of  the  immigrants  were  not  free  settlers, 
contributing  by  their  presence  to  the  political  life  of  the  com- 
munity, but  either  pardoned  criminals,  paupers,  or  victims  to  kid- 
nappers, who  were  sold  to  the  planters  and  held  in  a  state  of 
temporary  serfdom.  Thus  nothing  was  done  to  create  and  foster 
a  class  of  small  proprietors,  intermediate  between  the  large  plant- 
er and  the  hired  servants  or  bondsmen,  who  filled  the  place  of 
field  laborers.  To  what  extent  this  class  of  serfs  was  supplied 
by  the  transportation  of  criminals  is  uncertain.  One  thing,  how- 
ever, must  be  remembered.  Transportation  to  the  plantations 
generally  seems  to  have  been  regarded  as  a  mitigation  of  pun- 
ishment, and  to  have  been  awarded  to  those  who  were  con- 
demned to  death,  but  thought  deserving  of  leniency,  or  to  polit- 
ical offenders.3  Thus  we  may  believe  that  Virginia  was  not,  as 
sometimes  represented,  peopled  from  the  worst  class  of  crimi- 
nals. Moreover,  it  was  not  in  the  same  case  as  our  later  penal 
settlements.  The  criminals  were  a  mere  fragmentary  element  in 
Virginian  society ;  they  were  not  a  class  sharply  marked  off,  and 
they  were  doubtless  readily  absorbed  into  the  poor  and  unfortun- 
ate, but  not  necessarily  criminal,  population,  with  which  the 
Virginia  labor  market  was  supplied.  Their  status  seems  to  have 
been  formally  determined  by  a  law  passed  in  1643,  enacting  that 
all  servants  imported  without  any  indenture  or  special  covenant 
should  serve  for  periods  varying  from  four  to  seven  years,  ac- 
cording to  their  age,  and  then  be  free.4 

But  though  the  serf  became  free  he  did  not  as  a  rule  become 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1635,  May  25,  1636,  March  28.  2  lb.,  1638,  April  6. 

*  Thus  we  find  Elizabeth  Cotterell,  a  prisoner  in  the  Marshalsea,  petitioning  to  be  trans- 
ported to  Virginia.  Colonial  Papers,  1638,  August  6.  Again  a  letter  from  Lord  Russell  to 
Clement  Edwards,  February  7,  1619,  petitions  that  a  person  convicted  of  highway  robbery 
may  be  sent  to  Virginia  as  a  commutation  of  his  sentence.     Domestic  Papers. 

After  the  battle  of  Worcester,  we  find  the  Coi./icil  of  State  issuing  an  order  that  the  pris- 
oners desired  for  Virginia,  to  the  number  of  1,6.10,  be  granted  to  certain  persons  (probably 
Virginian  planters  or  merchants),  upon  giving  assurance  of  good  treatment.  Colonial  Pa- 
pers, 165 1,  September  10. 

So,  too,  we  find  the  Council  of  State  giving  a  license  to  Richard  Nethersole  to  transport  a 
hundred  Irish  Tories  to  Virginia.      Colonial  Papers,  1653,  September  24. 

4  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  257. 


PROSPERITY  OF  THE  COLONY. 


203 


independent.  Causes  already  mentioned  tended  to  keep  him 
dependent  on  his  richer  neighbor,  and  by  preventing  the  growth 
of  yeomanry  or  peasant  proprietors,  to  throw  the  control  of  the 
colony  into  the  hands  of  the  great  planters.  At  a  later  period 
we  shall  see  how  the  system  of  serfdom  died  out  before  a  rival 
form  of  labor,  destined  in  its  turn  to  saddle  the  colony  with  far 
greater  evils. 

The  territory  occupied  by  the  colonists,  with  the  exception  of 
one  outlying  settlement,  was  that  between  the  York,  or,  as  it 
Territorial  was  tnen  called,  the  Charles,  River,  and  the  James 
limits.  River.  The  plantations,  of  which  by  1633  there  were 
twenty*important  enough  to  return  representatives,  seem  to  have 
extended  about  seventy  miles  inland,  and  to  have  been  chiefly 
situated  along  the  James  River,  which  formed  the  southern 
boundary.1  Besides  these  there  was  an  outlying  settlement  on 
that  peninsula  which  runs  down  from  the  northern  arm  of  Ches- 
apeake Bay  to  form  Cape  Charles,  and  which  was  afterwards 
divided  into  the  counties  of  Accomac  and  Northampton.  At 
that  time  the  whole  peninsula  seems  to  have  borne  the  name  of 
Accomac,  and  to  have  been  occupied  by  nearly  a  thousand  set- 
tlers. There  may  also  have  been  outlying  settlements  beyond  the 
two  boundary  rivers,  but  if  so,  they  were  probably  more  of  the 
nature  of  trading  or  hunting  stations,  and  hardly  to  be  reckoned 
as  part  of  the  settled  territory. 

A  marked  and  significant  change  is  now  to  be  found  in  the 
temper  with  which  the  colonists  regarded  their  adopted  country. 
£id8conity  Virginia  was  no  longer  looked  on  as  a  mere  trading 
tentment     station  where  a  lucky  adventurer  might  make  a  fort- 

ofthe  .  J  ° 

settlers.  une  which  he  could  return  to  enjoy  in  England.  Men 
began  to  find  that  what  lately  had  been  regarded  as  a  dreary 
wilderness  fit  only  for  paupers  and  criminals,  might  become  an 
endurable  and  even  a  delightful  abode. 

The  building  of  brick  and  stone  houses  was  a  slight  but  sig- 
nificant sign  of  the  change  of  feeling.2  So  far  from  the  colony 
being  regarded  as  a  place  of  unwelcome  banishment,  we  are  told 
that  few  who  had  once  lived  there  ever  wished  to  leave  it.3  The 
same  feeling  may  be  traced  in- the  descriptions  of  the  colony  and 
of  colonial  life  addressed  to  people  in  England.     Advocates  of 

1  See  the  returns  of  members  in  Hening,  vol  i.  p.  202. 

2  Colonial  Papers,  1638,  April  6. 

*  Leah  and  Rachel,  or  the  Two  Fruitful  Sisters,  Virginia  ai.d  Maryland.  By  John 
Hammond.     London,  1656.     Published  by  Force,  vol.  iii.  p.  12. 


204  VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 

emigration  no  longer  endeavor  to  allure  their  readers  by  grand 
prospects  of  rivaling  Spain  either  in  the  conversion  of  the  heathen 
or  in  the  discovery  of  gold.  We  feel  that  the  romantic  era  of 
colonization,  with  its  wild  hopes  and  ambitions,  is  over.  Nor  do 
the  eulogists  of  Virginia  dwell  exclusively  or  even  mainly  on  the 
value  of  the  country  as  a  commercial  outpost  and  appendage  to 
England,  or  as  a  refuge  for  those  to  whom  the  Old  World  was 
but  a  harsh  stepmother.  They  begin  now,  in  what  we  may  call 
the  true  spirit  of  colonial  enthusiasm,  to  describe  the  manifold 
delights  of  Virginian  life.  Nature  here  gave  freely  those  good 
things  which  in  the  Old  World  could  only  be  wrung  from  her  by 
hard  toil.  The  labor  of  a  single  man  could  in  a  year  produce 
two  hundred  and  fifty  bushels  of  maize.1  Wheat  yielded  from 
thirty  to  fifty  fold,  maize  from  a  hundred  to  three  hundred  fold, 
and  the  latter  was  ready  to  gather  three  months  after  sowing.* 
The  prevalence  of  wolves  made  sheep-farming  difficult,  but  horned 
cattle  and  swine  needed  no  care  and  were  ready  for  the  butcher 
when  driven  out  of  the  woods.3  The  country  was  in  every  way 
fitted  for  that  out-door  life  which  was  naturally  dear  to  English- 
men. The  woods  swarmed  with  deer,  and  wild  fowl  were  so 
plentiful  that  twenty,  we  are  told,  might  be  killed  at  a  shot.4 
Wild  turkeys  grew  to  fifty  pounds  weight.  The  rivers  swarmed 
with  fish,  of  which  five  thousand  had  been  taken  at  a  single 
draught,  none  less  than  two  feet  long.5  If  we  are  to  believe 
these  writers,  the  colony  rejoiced  in  an  Arcadian  virtue  and  sim- 
plicity of  manners.  Houses  were  left  open  all  night  and  clothes 
suffered  to  hang  on  hedges  in  perfect  safety.  A  brotherly  and 
social  spirit  prevailed.  If  a  man  was  sick  his  neighbors  would 
see  that  his  crops  took  no  hurt.6  Travelers  were  entertained  in 
private  houses,  and  inns  were  unknown.7  These  accounts  may 
be  somewhat  colored,  but  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  the  abun- 
dance of  all  things  needful  for  life  left  but  little  temptation  to 
crime.  Nor  were  the  praises  of  Virginian  writers  limited  to  the 
material  advantages  of  the  country.     They  tell  us  of  the  beauty 

1  A  True  Relation  of  Virginia  and  Maryland.     By  Nathaniel  Shrigley.     London,  1669. 
Force,  vol.  iii.  p.  5. 
-  Virginia  Richly  and  Truly  Valued,  p    1 2. 
s  Shrigley,  p.  5. 
4  Beverley,  p.  134. 
6  Virginia  Richly  and  Truly  Valued,  pp.  12,  21. 

6  Leah  and  Rachel,  pp.  16,  19. 

7  lb.,  p.  15.  Norwood's  Voyage  to  Virginia,  Force,  vol.  iii.  p.  48.  Yet  it  is  clear  that 
this  was  not  literally  true  at  Jamestown,  as  we  shall  see  that  the  political  influence  of  Na- 
thaniel Bacon  was  strengthened  by  his  marriage  with  a  nth  widow  who  kept  a  tavern. 


EXPORTATION  OF  CORN  AND  CATTLE. 


205 


of  scenes  which  "  the  melanchollyest  eye  in  the  world  could  not 
look  upon  without  contentment  or  content  himself  without  admi- 
ration," and  where  "  purling  streams  and  wanton  rivers  every- 
where turned  the  happy  soil  into  perpetual  verdure  and  into  an 
unwearied  fertility."  l  Such  descriptions  are  the  best  proof  that 
the  miseries  of  early  colonial  life  and  the  struggles  against  the 
difficulties  of  the  wilderness  were  at  an  end.  Men  who  are  in 
hourly  dread  of  savage  foes  and  wild  beasts,  dependent  on  the 
uncertain  resources  of  the  forest,  and  threatened  by  the  hardships 
of  an  unknown  climate  and  untried  modes  of  life,  have  little 
leisure  or  inclination  to  meditate  on  the  charms  of  nature  which 
surround  them.  Obvious,  too,  and  somewhat  commonplace 
though  this  enthusiasm  may  seem,  it  is  full  of  deep  interest.  It 
is  the  first  indication  that  Englishmen  were  beginning  to  feel  a 
real  love  for  their  new  homes  beyond  the  Atlantic ;  it  is  the  )  ~ 
dawning  of  American  patriotism. 

More  definite  and  substantial  evidence  of  increased  prosperity     \ 
is  to  be  found  in  the  systematic  exportation  of  corn  from  Vir- 
Exporta-      ginia  to  the  struggling  settlements  of  New  England. 
tionoffood.<jn  j  5^4  Harvey  tells  his  friends  in  England  that  no 
less  than  ten  thousand  bushels  had  been  shipped  away,  and  that 
Virginia  had  become  "  the  granary  of  all  his  Majesty's  northern 
colonies."  2     Thirteen  years  later  the  Assembly  deemed  it  neces- 
sary in  a  time  of  scarcity  to  check  the  exportation  by  special 
enactment.3     We  have  already  seen,  too,  that  the  Marylanders 
hoped  to  supply  themselves  with  cattle  by  importing  from  Vir-     L. 
ginia.4     A  community  which  can  export  the  necessaries  of  life    T 
lias  already  surmounted  the  early  struggles  and  hardships  of  a 
newly-settled  country. 

We  must  not,  however,  be  led  away  into  supposing  that  all 
this  good  fortune  was  wholly  without  alloy.  There  were,  it  must 
Son  ofthe  ^e  rememDered,  two  influences  at  work  helping  to  color 
above  view,  these  early  accounts  of  Virginian  prosperity.  So  far  as 
they  are  taken  from  contemporary  reports,  written  just  when  the 
first  difficulties  and  depressions  of  colonial  life  had  been  over- 
come, they  were  in  a  measure  tinged  with  that  exultation  and 
that  slight  shade  of  boastfulness  which  almost  always  accompanies 
the  well-being  of  a  young  country.     Most,  of  the  writers,  too,  had 


1  Virginia  Richly  and  Truly  Valued,  pp.  11,  27. 
*  Colonial  Papers,  1634,  July  13. 

3  tt : :     


1  Hening,  i.  347 
*  See  p.  196. 


206  VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 

a  practical  end  to  serve  in  holding  out  highly-colored  views  to 
allure  immigrants.  Later  reports  are  equally  prone  to  be  dis- 
torted, though  by  different  feelings.  When  the  dullness  and  pet- 
tiness of  colonial  life  began  to  weigh  upon  Virginia,  when,  too,  it 
first  felt  a  share  in  the  evils  of  settled  countries  without  enjoying 
their  good  things,  then  men  began  to  look  back  and  to  create,  or 
at  least  embellish,  traditions  of  primitive  simplicity  and  happi- 
ness. The  soundest  of  all  contemporary  testimony,  the  statute- 
book,  reveals  one  or  two  weak  points  in  the  social  system  of  Vir- 
ginia which  the  panegyrists  whom  I  have  quoted  ignore  or  deny. 
They  tell  us  that  the  prosperous  little  community  lived  in  such 
peace  and  brotherly  love  as  to  need  no  professional  lawyers.  An 
Act  passed  in  1645,1  specially  directed  against  "unskilful  and 
covetous  attorneys,"  tells  a  different  tale.  Laws  against  hunting 
on  the  estates  of  other  men  show  that  the  abundance  of  land  did 
not  save  the  colony  from  some  of  the  evils  of  less  favored  coun- 
tries.2 '  A  petition  for  leave  to  emigrate,  the  framers  of  which 
complain  of  the  "  mean  produce  of  their  labours  upon  barren  and 
over-wrought  grounds,"  is  a  proof  that  the  supply  of  fertile  land 
was  not  actually  unlimited.3  The  records  also  snow  that  the 
prosperity  of  the  community  did  not  enable  it  to  dispense  with 
imprisonment  for  debt.4  All  this,  however,  proves  little  against 
the  general  well-being  of  the  colony.  The  helpless  and  improvi- 
dent will  be  found  everywhere,  and  we  cannot  doubt  that  Vir- 
ginia was  a  country  in  which  a  prosperous  and  happy  life  awaited 
all  who  were  willing  and  able  to  toil  for  it. 

This  increase  of  prosperity  brought  a  new  evil  in  its  train. 
Hitherto,  whatever  troubles  might  have  threatened  the  little  com- 
munity— internal  strife,  court  displeasure,  thriftlessness, 

acemen.    fam^ne^  or  war — one  at  jeast  was  unknown#     Virginia 

offered  no  temptation  to  hungry  placemen,  such  as  those  whom 
the  rule  of  the  Stuarts  had  turned  loose  upon  the  mother  country. 
Now  we  have  indications  of  this  danger,  slight,  it  is  true,  yet  fore- 
shadowing the  evils  of  the  next  century,  when  the  public  service 
of  the  American  colonies  was  crowded  with  broken  spendthrifts 
and  corrupt  adventurers. 

We  have  already  seen  the  suspicion  with  which  the  Virginians 
viewed  the  arrival  of  Captain  Young,  sent  on  a  mysterious  errand 
by  the  king.     Sandys  too  seems  to   have  sought  Virginia  in  the 

1  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  30^.  2  lb.,  vol.  i.  pp.  228,  248,  477:  ii.  p.  96 

8  lb.,  vol.  i  p.  355.  *  lb.,  vol.  i.  p.  4"  5 


PL  A  CEMEN  IN  VI R  GINIA .  207 

spirit  of  a  thorough  placeman,  ready  for  employment  alike  un- 
der the  crown,  the  Company,  or  the  Assembly.  So  also  we  find 
petitions  addressed  by  Richard  Kemp  to  the  crown,  at  first  re- 
minding the  king  of  his  claims  to  the  office  of  Secretary  in 
Virginia,  and  then  when  these  had  been  successful,  dwelling  on 
the  curtailment  of  his  official  gains.1  Nor  was  this  confined  to 
the  civil  service.  One  would  suppose  that  a  country  whose  war- 
fare was  limited  to  repelling  occasional  raids  by  the  Indians, 
might  have  been  safely  left  to  the  defense  of  her  own  militia. 
Yet  we  find  a  petition  addressed  to  the  king  asking  for  the  high- 
sounding  offices  of  Marshal  and  of  Muster  Master-General  in 
Virginia.2  It  is  clear,  too,  that  the  presence  of  these  military 
adventurers  was  attended  with  danger  to  the  colony  beyond  that 
of  mere  expense.  In  1631  one  Donne  refers  to  his  own  ap- 
pointment to  both  the  above-mentioned  offices,  and  also  to  his 
services  as  the  agent  employed  by  Harvey  to  prosecute  certain 
seditious  persons.3  The  immediate  mischief  might  be  slight,  but 
the  matter  is  of  interest  as  the  first  symptom  of  an  abuse  which 
had  no  small  share  in  bringing  about  the  final  breach  between 
the  colonies  and  the  mother  country. 

In  1639  Harvey  was  succeeded  by  Wyatt.  His  instructions  are 
no  longer  extant,  but  they  seem  to  have  been  identical  with  those 
afterwards  given  to  Berkeley.4  Wyatt's  period  of  office  was  un- 
eventful, and  the  records  of  the  time  throw  no  light  on  his 
w  an nciS  Personal  character  or  his  policy.  Indeed,  there  is  no 
Governor,  man  who  fills  an  equally  prominent  place  in  early  Vir- 
ginian history  of  whom  we  know  so  little. 

That  assuredly  cannot  be  said  of  his  successor.  The  robust 
figure  of  Sir  William  Berkeley,  narrow  of  mind,  hot  of  temper, 
wiiiiam  anc^  frank  °f  speech,  stands  out  in  his  letters  and  actions 
Berkeley,  as  clearly  as  any  of  those  which  live  for  us  in  the  pages 
of  Clarendon.  Of  his  antecedents  we  know  little,  but  later 
events  show  him  to  have  been  a  Cavalier  of  the  school  of  Digby 
and  Astley,  rather  than  of  Hyde  and  Falkland.  His  own  let- 
ters present  him  to  us  as  a  rough,  out-spoken  man,  with  no  lack 
of  plain  sense,  and  with  a  squire-like  contempt  for  all  forms  of 
book-learning.  In  his  later  days  he  appears  as  little  better  than 
a  merciless  and  rapacious  tyrant,  but  it  is  both  charitable  and 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1634,  September,  1638,  February  20. 
>  lb.,  1631,  August.  3  lb.,  1640,  August. 

4  A  minute  in  a  Colonial  Entry  Book  states  that  they  were  the  ^anie.  This,  however,  may 
not  mean  identical  in  detail,  but  only  in  general  substance. 


r- 


- 


208  VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 

reasonable  to  believe  that  his  vices  were  called  out  by  the  change- 
ful fortunes  of  those  stirring  times,  by  the  sufferings  of  his  party 
and  its  revengeful  triumph,  in  each  of  which  he  had  a  share. 
For  the  present  he  seems  to  have  been  politically  in  union  with  a 
large  and  influential  party  in  Virginia,  while  his  personal  quali- 
ties, if  they  did  not  make  him  universally  popular,  at  least  saved 
him  from  the  hatred  of  his  opponents. 

The  instructions  with  which  he  was  sent  out  are  interesting 
from  more  than  one  point  of  view.  The  dangers  which  were 
His  in-  threatening  the  crown  made  it  expedient  to  enumerate 
struftions.i  formally  certain  principles  which  had  hitherto  been  se- 
cured only  by  usage.  The  imposition  of  the  oath  of  allegianceT 
and  the  provision  for  the  establishment  of  public  worship  accord- 
ing to  Anglican  usage,  were  little  more  than  formal  repetitions  of 
accepted  principles,  and  were  probably  quite  in  harmony  with 
the  views  of  most  of  the  settlers.  There  was  practically  nothing 
new  in  the  order  by  which  the  appointment  of  the  minor  public  offi- 
cers was  formally  vested  in  the  Governor,  while  the  crown  re-, 
tained  its  right  of  nominating  the  higher  officials.  But  at  least 
one  important  constitutional  change  was  introduced.  Council- 
ors were  to  be  exempted  from  all  taxes  save  those  for  the  sup- 
port of  the  Church,  and  special  imposts  for  public  buildings  and 
purposes  of  war.  That  this  exemption  included  ten  of  the  ser- 
vants of  each  councilor  is  an  incidental  proof  of  the  patriarchal 
establishments  of  the  large  planters.  This  enactment,  by  ex- 
empting one  branch  of  the  legislature  from  taxation,  must  inevi- 
tably have  detached  its  financial  interests  from  those  of  the 
community,  and  diminished  the  motive  for  frugality.  We  cannot 
doubt  that  this  was  at  once  a  symptom  and  a  cause  of  that  sep- 
aration of  the  community  into  an  oligarchical  and  a  popular 
party,  of  which  we  have  still  clearer  evidence  at  a  later  date,  and  it 
is  important  to  observe  that  the  former  seems  thus  early  to  have 
enjoyed  the  support  and  favor  of  the  crown.  Save  in  this  one 
point,  the  instructions  to  Berkeley  were,  like  most  of  Charles  I.'s 
dealings  with  Virginia,  moderate  and  politic,  free  alike  from  the 
meddlesome  interference  of  his  father  and  the  profusion  and  ra- 
pacity of  Charles  II.  and  his  creatures.  The  new  Governor  was 
instructed  to  encourage  the  growth  of  hemp,  vines,  and  other 
commodities,  and  to  regulate  the  production  of  tobacco.     The 

1  These  instructions  are  in  the  Colonial  Entry  Book,  lxxix.  p.  219-30.     A  full  epitome  of 
them  is  given  by  Mr.  Sainsbury,  p.  321. 


SECOND  INDIAN  MA SSA  CRE.  '  209 

intercourse  between  the  colonists  and  the  crews  of  merchant 
ships  was  to  be  under  the  control  of  the  Governor.  Trade  with 
the  savages  was  only  to  be  allowed  under  special  license,  and  the 
obligation  to  build  a  house  was  reimposed  on  the  holders  of 
land.  By  a  wise  regulation  new-comers  were  exempted  from 
certain  taxes.  The  increase  of  trade  was  recognized  in  the  es- 
tablishment of  quarterly  courts  for  the  trial  of  civil  suits,  as  well 
as  minor  courts  for  suits  where  the  matter  at  issue  did  not  exceed 
ten  pounds  in  value.  These  courts  were  also  empowered  to  try 
petty  offenses. 

The  arrival  of  the  new  Governor  was  marked  by  a  great  pub- 
lic calamity.  During  fifty  years  of  peace  the  settlers  had  forgot- 
Another  ten  the  massacre,  and  the  savages  had  forgotten  the 
massacre.i  vengeance  which  followed.  But  one  at  least  of  the 
Indians  looked  back  with  regret  to  the  days  when  no  white  in- 
truder had  ever  set  foot  on  the  realms  of  Powhatan.  Opechanca- 
nough  was  now  in  title,  as  he  had  been  before  in  reality,  the 
supreme  ruler,  and  his  hatred  of  the  English  had  been  only  wait- 
ing for  a  fit  opportunity.  His  bodily  strength  had  passed  away, 
but  the  Indian  could  reverence  chiefs  whose  authority  rested  sole- 
ly on  strength  of  mind  and  will.  The  outbreak  of  the  war 
between  the  king  and  the  Parliament,  among  its  other  remote  and 
indirect  results,  furnished  Opechancanough  with  the  chance  for 
which  he  had  long  hoped.  Rumors  found  their  way  amid  the  In- 
dian villages  that  the  invaders  were  at  strife  among  themselves, 
and  one  savage  had  actually  seen  two  English  ships  in  combat  off 
Jamestown.  Such  calculations  show  how  much  intimacy  there 
was  between  the  two  races,  and  how  much  of  cool  statecraft  en- 
tered into  the  revengeful  temper  of  the  savage.  In  1644  the  first  / 
blow  was  struck.  It  fell  on  an  unsuspecting  people,  and  before  an  J 
attempt  at  resistance  could  be  made  three  hundred  of  the  settlers 
had  perished.  Then  it  would  seem  the  courage  of  the  assailants 
suddenly  failed  them.  No  better  proof  can  be  found  of  the  in- 
creased stability  of  the  settlement  than  the  trifling  effect  produced 
by  what  thirty  years  before  would  have  been  regarded  as  an  almost 
fatal  blow.  No  contemporary  writer  has  thought  it  worth  while 
to  preserve  the  details  of  the  second  massacre,  and  it  left  no 

1  The  materials  for  an  account  of  this  war  are  but  scanty.  A  good  deal  may  be  learned 
from  the  statutes  in  Hening.  There  is  an  incidental  reference  to  it  in  the  contemporary 
journal  of  Winthrop,  the  New  England  statesman.  The  submission  of  Necottowance  is 
described  in  a  pamphlet  in  Force,  vol.  ii.,  entitled  A  Perfect  Description  of  Virginia,  by 
Richard  Wodenoth.     London,  1649. 


4 


2io  VIRGINIA   UNDER  ROYAL  GOVERNMENT. 

abiding  trace  on  the  social  and  industrial  life  of  the  colony.  At 
first  the  task  of  defense  and  revenge  was  left  to  be  carried  out  by 
the  hastily-raised  militia  of  the  districts  specially  threatened,  and 
the  war  consisted  of  a  series  of  border  skirmishes.  But  in  the 
spring  of  1646  it  became  evident  that  unless  hostilities  were  to 
drag  on,  and  to  imperil  the  security  and  well-being  of  the  colony, 
more  decisive  measures  must  be  taken.  A  force  of  sixty  men 
was  raised  at  public  expense,  and  a  fort  was  built  to  cut  off  the 
I  ndians  from  their  fisheries.  It  is  worth  noting  that  the  number 
of  men  to  be  raised,  their  pay,  and  the  special  manner  of  their 
employment,  were  all  left  to  the  Assembly,  a  strong  illustration  of 
the  popular  character  of  the  colonial  government. 

In  the  same  year  the  war  was  ended  by  the  capture  of  Ope- 
chancanough.  Though  we  have  no  definite  contemporary  au- 
oeechan"  thority,  we  may  safely  accept  colonial  tradition  as 
canough.  evidence  for  the  fact  of  his  death  soon  after.  The  de- 
tails of  his  end  are  uncertain.  According  to  one  story,  Berkeley 
brought  him  to  Jamestown  and  exhibited  him  in  triumph  to  the 
citizens,  an  insult  which  only  extorted  from  the  captive  king  the 
high-minded  reproach  that  he  would  have  treated  his  enemy  far 
differently  had  their  fates  been  reversed.1  The  Governor,  it  is 
added,  would  have  sent  Opechancanough  as  a  prisoner  to  Eng- 
land if  the  Indian  had  not  perished  by  the  brutality  of  one  of  the 
soldiers  who  captured  him.  One  cannot  help  suspecting  that 
tradition  may  have  done  something  to  color  this  story  and  to  give 
a  fittingly  dramatic  end  to  the  great  enemy  of  the  English,  the 
last  formidable  representative  of  the  house  of  Powhatan. 

His  death  ended  the  war.  His  successor,  Necottowance,  at 
once  came  to  terms,  and  a  solemn  treaty  was  drawn  up  and 
Xin^fhis  signe(l-  The  opening  article  pledging  the  English  to 
successor,  uphold  the  Indian  king  against  all  rebels,  raises  a  sus- 
picion that  the  Virginian  government  were  adopting  what  has 
been  so  often  our  policy  in  India,  and  setting  up  a  creature  of  their 
own  whose  authority  had  to  be  supported  from  without.  The 
treaty  went  on  to  mark  out  the  frontier,  and  established  a  system 
of  badges  as  passports.  Indian  children  of  twelve  years  old  were 
exempted  from  this  condition,  otherwise  all  persons  of  either  race 
who  crossed  the  frontier  without  a  badge  did  so  at  the  risk  of 
their  lives.  In  the  following  March,  Necottowance  with  five  of 
his  chief  men  came  in  to  Jamestown  and  made  a  solemn  profes- 

1  Beverley,  p.  5a 


OPECHANCANO UGH'S  SUCCESSOR.  2 1 1 

sion  of  loyalty.  For  thirty  years  there  was  almost  uninterrupted 
peace  between  the  two  races,  and  when  an  Indian  war  did  again 
break  out,  it  was  mainly  dangerous  from  its  effect  on  the  internal 
politics  of  the  colony. 


JNIVERSITY 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  COMMONWEALTH.1 

The  ascendency  of  the  Commonwealth  opens  a  new  era  in 
colonial  history,  and  that  in  a  twofold  manner.  In  the  first  place, 
The  coio-  it:  marked  the  beginning  of  a  definite  colonial  policy, 
niai  policy    Hitherto  the  colonies,  actual  or  projected,  had  been 

of  the  Com-  .    *  . 

monweaith.  dealt  with  on  no  fixed  and  distinct  principles.  Their 
fortunes  had  been  left  to  the  enterprise,  the  benevolence,  or  the 
rapacity  of  individual  citizens,  to  the  wisdom  or  folly  of  the  sov- 
ereign. By  the  Navigation  Act  the  Long  Parliament  first  prac- 
tically asserted  and  acted  on  the  doctrine  that  the  colonies  formed 
a  connected  whole,  a  member  of  the  body  politic,  to  be  dealt 
with  on  certain  fixed  principles  and  for  the  benefit  of  the  entire 
community.  In  this  matter  the  Long  Parliament  was  more  fort- 
unate than  in  many  others.  Much  of  its  legislation  was  but  an 
unfulfilled  anticipation  of  distant  reforms,  only  to  be  achieved 
after  many  generations  had  passed  away.  In  dealing  with  the 
colonies  it  established  principles  which  held- good  till  the  hour  of 
their  separation. 

Moreover,  the  relations  of  Virginia  to  the  Long  Parliament 
•mark  a  change  within  the  colony  itself.  At  an  earlier  period  the 
vir^nfa  °f  conflict  °f  parties  in  England  would  have  had  no  more 
towards  effect  on  the  plantation  by  James  River  than  it  would 
England,  on  the  factories  at  Bantam  or  Surat.  The  struggle  of 
king  and  Parliament  might  have  interested  the  Virginian  tobacco- 
growers  as  it  would  interest  any  other  English  citizens.  There 
might  be  amongst  them  both  Royalists  and  Puritans,  and  so  far 
the  conflict  might  call  out  corresponding  divisions.     But  these 

1  The  materials  for  this  portion  of  Virginian  history  are  somewhat  scanty.     Our  knowledge 
of  it  is  chiefly  derived  from  Hening's  Collection,  with  occasional  help  from  the  State  Papers 
And  from  Beverley. 
21  2 


PAR  TIES  IN  VIRGINIA .  2 1 3 

divisions  would  have  only  concerned  themselves  indirectly  with 
Virginian  politics.  It  marks  a  distinct  stage  in  the  political 
growth  of  Virginia  that  each  of  the  combatants  in  England  should 
have  found  allies  in  the  colony  ready  to  be  marshaled  against 
one  another,  and  separated  by  questions  and  principles  which 
concerned  the  government  of  Virginia,  but  which  nevertheless 
bore  some  likeness  to  those  which  divided  the  two  great  parties 
in  England. 

Some  historians  have  indeed  taken  a  different  view  of  the  sit- 
uation. They  tell  us  that  the  triumph  of  the  Commonwealth  and 
the  triumph  of  the  restored  Monarchy  were  both  of  them  events 
of  little  importance  to  the  Virginians.  The  colony,  they  tell  us,- 
acquiesced  placidly  in  each  change.  According  to  them,  the 
completeness  of  each  was  due  to  the  total  indifference  of  the  col- 
onists. Various  grave  objections  to  this  view  at  once  suggest 
themselves.  Were  the  Virginians,  who  had  shown  so  bold  a 
front  when  their  liberties  were  threatened  by  Harvey,  who  had 
resisted  so  promptly  and  strenuously  the  attempt  to  restore  the 
Company,  and  who  had  upheld  their  territorial  rights  against  the 
encroachments  of  the  court  favorite,  Lord  Baltimore,  were  these 
men  likely  to  be  handed  backwards  and  forwards  from  one  gov- 
ernment to  another  like  a  flock  of  sheep,  without  any  wish  or 
feeling  in  the  matter  ? 

It  is  indeed  impossible  to  look  at  the  facts  of  the  case  and  not 
feel  assured  of  the  existence  of  two  opposite  parties  in  the  colony. 
Berkeley's  popularity,  the  hopes  which  the  king's  party  built  on 
Virginia,  the  fact  that  many  of  the  defeated  Cavaliers  found  a 
refuge  there,  and  the  ease  with  which  the  Restoration  was  effect- 
ed, all  prove  incontestably  the  existence  of  a  Royalist  party. 

On  the  other  hand,  a  few  years  later,  Berkeley  found  men  ready 
to  withstand  him  to  the  death  on  behalf  of  popular  rights,  and 
the  instances  just  mentioned,  the  dealings  of  the  colonists  with 
Harvey  and  Baltimore,  show  that  the  leaders  of  the  Virginia 
Company,  Sandys  and  Southampton,  had  bequeathed  a  full  share 
'of  their  spirit  to  the  colony  which  they  founded.  The  whole 
early  history  of  Virginia  loses  its  meaning  and  coherence,  unless 
we  believe  in  the  existence  of  two  parties,  whose  antecedents  and 
interests  led  them  to  side,  the  one  with  the  crown,  the  other  with 
the  Parliament.  The  easy  and  bloodless  character  of  each  change 
is  explained  if  we  suppose  that  there  was  an  intermediate  body 
comparatively  indifferent  to  the  struggle  of  parties  in  England, 


2I4  VIRGINIA   UNDER  THE  COMMONWEALTH. 

anxious  only  to  save  Virginia  from  spoliation  and  bloodshed,  and 
for  that  end  willing  to  throw  in  their  lot  with  the  side  whose  suc- 
cess held  out  the  speediest  hopes  of  peace.  There  is,  too,  another 
consideration  which  helps  to  explain  the  moderation  of  the  com- 
batants. In  England  each  party  was  exasperated  by  grievous 
wrongs,  and  hence  its  hour  of  triumph  was  also  its  hour  of  re- 
venge. The  struggle  in  Virginia  was  imbittered  by  no  such  rec- 
ollections. In  the  conduct  of  their  rulers  the  Virginians  had 
nothing  worse  to  complain  of  than  the  paltry  misdoings  of  Har- 
vey. The  civil  tyranny  of  Strafford,  the  ecclesiastical  tyranny  of 
Laud,  the  truculent  folly  of  Digby,  the  vacillation  and  duplicity 
of  the  king,  were  unknown  to  them,  or  known  only  as  faint  and 
distant  rumors.  The  complaints  against  Harvey  and  Baltimore, 
the  slight  inequalities  in  the  condition  of  the  Councilors,  though 
enough  to  keep  alive  a  spirit  of  resistance,  were  trivial  indeed 
compared  with  the  misdeeds  of  the  Star  Chamber  and  the  griev- 
ance of  ship-money.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Virginian  Royalists 
had  not  in  their  day  of  victory  to  avenge  the  plunder  and  dese- 
cration of  the  Church,  the  ruin  of  manor-houses,  the  stern  repres- 
sion of  all  that  makes  social  life  bright  and  cheerful.  According- 
ly, the  establishment  of  the  Commonwealth  and  the  restoration 
of  the  crown  were  each  effected,  not  merely  without  bloodshed, 
but  almost  without  violence.  Each  resembled  a  change  of  min- 
istry rather  than  a  revolution.  Yet  a  change  of  ministry  is  not 
necessarily  the  less  important  because  it  is  effected  without  dan- 
ger to  the  life  and  estate  of  a  single  citizen,  and  the  triumph  of 
the  Parliament  and  the  restoration  of  Charles  II.  each  left  an 
abiding  impress  on  the  institutions  and  history  of  Virginia. 

There  was  yet  another  feature  of  the  case  which  tended  to 
diminish  the  bitterness  of  the  contest.  The  issue  was  almost  ex- 
Absence  of  clusively  political ;  religion  had  little  or  no  share  in  the 
fous^oif-"  dispute.  The  leaders  of  the  Virginia  Company  mostly, 
test-  though  not  wholly,  belonged  to  that  party  which  was 

equally  opposed  to  Rome  and  to  Geneva.  The  colony  had  re- 
tained the  character  impressed  on  it  by  its  founders.  In  some 
respects,  indeed,  the  Virginians  had  adopted  usages  which  we 
are  apt  to  regard  as  peculiar  to  Puritanism.  Both  religion  and 
morality  were  strictly  protected  by  penal  enactments.  Under  an 
Act  passed  in  1623  and  renewed  six  years  later,  absence  from 
divine  service  was  punished  by  a  fine  of  a  hogshead  of  tobacco, 
and  if  the  offender  persisted  for  a  whole  month  the  fine  was  in- 


NONCONFORMISTS  IN  VIRGINIA.  2 1 5 

creased  to  fifty  pounds.  At  the  same  time  the  magistrates  were 
ordered  to  see  that  the  Sabbath  day  was  not  profaned  by  any 
employments,  or  journeying  from  place  to  place.1 

But  this  Puritan  legislation  implied  no  sympathy  with  Non- 
conformity. This  was  quickly  seen  when  an  Independent  con- 
Inteonnd"  gregati°n  attempted  to  set  foot  in  the  colony.  The 
gregations  history  of  the  first  Nonconformist  emigrants  in  Virginia 
ginia.2  is  obscure.  But  it  is  certain  that  by  1642  they  had  be- 
come sufficiently  important  to  form  the  principal,  if  not  the  entire, 
population  of  three  parishes.  The  Virginian  clergy,  as  may  be 
well  believed,  could  not  supply  the  new-comers  with  the  minis- 
trations they  desired.  Some  of  their  leading  men  were  already 
connected  with  the  now  prosperous  colony  of  Massachusetts. 
Boston  was  the  intellectual  centre  of  American  Puritanism,  and 
thither  the  Virginians  turned  for  help.  Their  petition  was  laid 
before  a  town  meeting  at  Boston,  and  three  ministers  were  sent 
to  them.  The  Virginian  legislature  was  at  once  up  in  arms 
against  this  inroad  of  dissent.  In  1642  the  Assembly  had  passed 
a  law  binding  the  church-wardens  to  prosecute  various  offenders 
against  ecclesiastical  discipline,  including  those  who  "contemn 
God's  holy  sacrament."3  In  1644  this  was  followed  by  a  more 
direct  attack.  A  law  was  passed  forbidding  any  person  to  offici- J) 
ate  in  a  church  within  the  colony  who  did  not  conform  to  the]' 
Book  of  Common  Prayer.4  The  measure  answered  its  end.  For 
a  while  the  Nonconformists  resisted,  but  to  no  purpose.  Some 
of  them  were  fined,  and  the  three  ministers  banished.  At  length 
they  abandoned  the  colony  in  despair  and  took  refuge  in  Mary- 
land, there  to  find  toleration  either  from  the  wisdom  or  the  indif- 
ference of  a  Romanist  proprietor.5 

Before  entering  upon  the  history  of  the  coming  struggle  it  will 

1  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  144. 

2  Our  knowledge  of  these  independent  settlers  in  Virginia  is  mainly  derived  from  New 
England  sources.  We  have  two  contemporary  authorities,  the  journal  of  John  Winthrop,  one 
of  the  founders  of  Massachusetts  and  sometime  governor  of  that  colony,  and  the  Wonder- 
working Providence  of  Sion's  Saviour,  by  Edward  Johnson,  published  in  1659.  Johnson's 
account  of  the  Puritan  settlement  is  the  fullest.  Both  writers  consider  the  massacre  of  the 
Virginians  by  the  Indians  in  1644  a  judgment  for  their  treatment  of  the  Puritans.  Winthrop 
calls  Berkeley  "  Sir  Robert,"  an  inaccuracy  which  curiously  illustrates  the  want  of  connection 
between  the  two  colonies. 

3  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  240.  4  lb.,  p.  277. 
6  Johnson  says  that  they  moved  "  many  hundred  miles  up  the  country."     He  also  mentions 

one  "  Mr.  Duren  "  as  a  leading  man  among  them.  This  probably  was  that  George  Durant 
who  figured  afterwards  among  the  early  settlers  in  Carolina,  and  as  one  of  Bacon's  supporters. 

Bis  possible  that  some  of  these  exiled  Puritans  helped  to  form  those  outlying  settlements 


216  VIRGINIA   UNDER  THE  COMMONWEALTH 

be  well  to  analyze  the  constitution  of  the  colony,  and  to  ex- 
Distribu-  amine  the  relations  of  its  component  parts  one  to  an- 
tion  of  •        other 

power  in        vuici. 

the  virgin-/    The  Virginian  constitution  was  an  imitation,  partly, 

ian  consti- 1  o  j       i 

tution.  we  may  believe,  deliberate,  partly,  we  cannot  doubt, 
unconscious,  of  that  of  the  mother  country.  The  doctrine  that 
constitutions  are  not  made  but  grow,  is  a  dangerous  one,  if  it  be 
used  to  justify  familiar  abuses,  or  to  discourage  the  struggles  of 
a  young  community  striving  to  shape  for  itself  free  institutions. 
But  it  is  an  undoubted  truth,  if  it  means  that  certain  political 
principles  and  customs  have  become  by  generations  of  usage  as 
familiar  to  Englishmen  as  the  language  they  speak,  and  as  easily 
and  unconsciously  acquired.  To  the  Virginian  colonists  the  dif- 
ficulty would  have  lain,  not  in  copying  the  institutions  of  Eng- 
land, but  in  deviating  frorrTtKem.  Thus  the  Virginian  constitu- 
tion, like  its  prototype,  was  in  its  nature  illogical  and  a  compro- 
mise. The  functions  of  the  different  members  of  the  system  were 
not  clearly  marked  off,  but,  as  in  England,  overlapped.  The 
efficient  working  of  the  constitution  presupposed  a  certain  har- 
mony which  was  nowhere  formally  expressed.  The  want  of  this 
harmony  might  at  any  time  bring  things  to  a  deadlock. 

Roughly  speaking,  the  division  of  powers  between  the  three 

members  of  the  body  politic  corresponded  with  that  of  the  Eng- 

z  lish  constitution.     Practically,  we  may  say  that  the  powers  en- 

i    joyed  by  the  crown  in  England  were  in  Virginia  shared  between 

•j^the  crown  and  its  representative,  the  Governor.  The  crown  ap- 
pointed the  executive,  and  in  part  the  judiciary,  and  had  a  right 
of  veto  on  legislation.  The  Governor  appointed  certain  minor 
judicial  officials,  and  issued   military  commissions.1     He  also, 

1  assisted  by  his  Council,  granted  land,  thus  maintaining  the  Eng- 
lish doctrine  that  the  primary  possession  of  the  soil  was  vested  in 
the  sovereign.2  At  the  same  time  the  Assembly,  on  more  than 
one  occasion,  claimed  and  exercised  the  right  to  deal  with  unin- 
habited territory  when  the  safety  of  the  community  made  the 
manner  of  its  occupation  a  matter  of  special  importance.3 

At  what  precise  period  the  Governor  acquired  a  veto  inde- 
pendent of  that  possessed  by  the  crown  is  uncertain.  It  is  first 
definitely  mentioned  in  Berkeley's  instructions,  but  it  there  ap- 
pears as  an  established  usage,  not  a  fresh  claim.      On  the  other 

1  Berkeley's  instructions.     Cotonial  Papers,  1641. 
8  Beverley,-  pp.  204,  240. 
•  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  291. 


THE  VIRGINIAN  CONSTITUTION.  217 

hand,  the  manner  in  which  Harvey  asserted  this  right  would 
rather  lead  one  to  believe  that  it  had  not  been  formally  conferred 
in  his  commission  or  instructions.1  It  is  not  impossible  that  his 
disputes  with  the  Assembly  may  have  taught  the  crown  the  neces- 
sity of  claiming  this  right  for  its  representative. 

The  judicial  power  was  vested  in  the  Governor  and  Council,  L 
#and  was  discharged  partly  in  person,  partly  by  unpaid  magis- 
trates  appointed  by  the  Governor.  These  magistrates  were  called 
Commissioners  of  County  Courts.2  The  extent  and  mode  of 
their  jurisdiction  was  more  than  once  changed  by  special  enact- 
ments. At  first  they  sat  monthly  to  try  small  civil  cases,  in  which 
there  was  a  right  of  appeal  to  the  Governor  and  Council.3  In 
1642  their  sittings  were  reduced  to  six  in  the  year,  and  their 
power  increased  by  an  enactment  which  allowed  a  single  com- 
missioner to  deal  with  cases  of  less  than  twenty  shillings  value, 
and  to  inflict  imprisonment  in  case  of  non-payment.4  Three 
years  later  their  jurisdiction  was  extended  to  all  civil  trials,  where 
both  parties  consented.  In  all  save  trifling  cases  the  decision  of 
the  county  court  might  be  overruled  by  the  Governor  and  Coun- 1 
cil  on  appeal,  and  all  matters  which  did  not  come  under  the  juris-  \ 
diction  of  these  commissioners  were  tried  by  the  Governor  and 
Council  as  the  supreme  court  of  the  colony.5 

The  Council,  as  we  have  seen,  was  appointed  by  the  crown. 
Practically,  the  appointment  must  have  lain,  in  a  great  measure, 
with  the  Governor,  as  being  the  channel  through  which  the  crown 
would  derive  nearly  all  its  knowledge  of  the  internal  politics  of 
the  colony  and  of  the  temper  of  individuals.  Thus  the  Council  / 
was  but  a  feeble  and  imperfect  check  on  the  Governor  on  behalf, 
of  the  crown,  while  it  was  no  check  at  all  on  behalf  of  the  Com- 
mons. 

In  addition  to  the  legislative  and  judicial  functions  of  the 
Council  and  its  duty  of  advising  the  Governor,  each  member  of 
it  held  a  colonel's  commission.  Moreover,  an  Act  passed  in  1640 
confirmed  the  exemption  from  taxes  which  Berkeley's  instructions 
had  already  granted  to  the  Councilors.  This  confirmation  of  a 
royal  mandate  may  be  looked  on  in  one  way  as  an  act^of  sub- 
mission, in  another  as  an  assertion  of  the  co-ordinate  power  of  the 
legislature. 

1  See  p.  197. 

2  These  county  courts  were  first  established  in  March  1624.     Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  125.     The 

presiding  officers  were  first  called  Commissioners  in  1631.     lb.,  p.  168. 

3  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  168.  4  lb.,  p.  272.  6  Ib.%  p.  303. 


i- 


218  VIRGINIA   UNDER  THE  COMMONWEALTH. 

The  few  remaining  public  officials,  including  the  Secretary 
were  appointed  by  the  crown,  and,  as  with  the  Council,  the  Gov- 
ernor's advice  must  have  carried  weight  in  the  selection. 

Thus  we  see  that  the  judiciary  and  executive  were  entirely 
appointed  by  the  crown  or  its  representative.  There  only  re- 
mained the  power  of  legislation  and  the  imposition  of  taxes. 
I  The  former  power  was  shared  with  the  Council  and  controlled  by 
I  the  royal  veto.  The  veto,  it  must  be  remembered,  was  not,  as 
in  England  at  this  day,  an  obsolete  weapon,  the  use  of  which, 
though  formally  permissible,  would  be  in  real  truth  a  step  towards 
revolution.  As  we  shall  see  from  the  case  of  other  colonies,  the 
application  of  the  veto  to  colonial  legislation  would  in  no  way 
have  offended  the  political  ideas  of  the  day,  nor,  as  far  as  we  can 
judge,  have  been  deemed  a  grievance  by  the  colonists  unless 
harshly  exercised.  Practically  there  is  no  trace  of  the  employ- 
ment of  the  veto  by  Charles  I.,  though  the  imperfect  state  of 
the  records  makes  it  unsafe  to  assume  that  it  never  was  so  used. 

The  division  of  legislative  power  between  the  Council  and 
Burgesses  did  not  correspond  to  that  which  now  subsists  between 
the  two  English  Houses  of  Parliament.  Following  the  prece- 
dent of  earlier  times,  and  the  system  adopted  by  the  Scotch 
Parliament,  Councilors  and  Burgesses  sat  together  and  voted  as 
one  chamber.1  It  is  clear  that  such  an  arrangement  is  to  the 
advantage  of  the  more  united  body,  which,  by  voting  compactly, 
can  often  convert  a  minority  of  the  other  order  into  a  majority 
of  the  whole.  Nor  can  there  be  much  doubt  that  a  small 
body  appointed  by  the  crown  would  in  general  be  more  united 
than  one  which  owed  its  existence  to  the  variable  and  fluctuating 
choice  of  the  electors. 

The  one  remaining  power  was  that  of  taxation,  and  on  this 
point  the  Commons  of  Virginia  made  a  clear  and  explicit  claim. 
jAs  early  as  1623  the  Assembly  passed  an  enactment  claiming  for 
i  itself  the  exclusive  right  of  imposing  taxes.2  So  determined  was  the 
Assembly  in  asserting  this1  principle,  that  the  enactment  in  which 
it  was  set  forth  was  confirmed  in  almost  the  same  words  in  1631, 
1632,  and  1642. 3  In  fact  it  was  manifestly  regarded  as  in  some 
sort  a  charter  of  colonial  liberty.  Such  an  Act  cannot  be  looked 
on  as  constitutionally  binding,  since  no  expression  of  will  or  in- 
tention by  one  portion  of  the  legislature  can  deprive  the  sovereign 


1  Beverley,  p.  205. 

*  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  124.  3  /<$.,  vol.  i.  pp.  171,  196,  244. 


VIRGINIAN  AND  ENGLISH  CONSTITUTIONS.         219 

power,  wherever  vested,  of  the  right  to  override  such  a  declara- 
tion by  subsequent  legislation.  The  value  of  such  an  Act  is 
independent  of,  or  antecedent  to,  the  constitution.  It  is  a  declar- 
ation by  the  main  part  of  the  community  of  what  the  constitu- 
tion ought  to  be.  It  furnishes  a  definite  ground  on  which  that 
part  of  the  community  may  join  issue  with  the  rest,  if  the  rights 
which  it  claims  are  invaded.  In  choosing  this  question  as  their 
political  battle-ground  the  colonists  were  guided  by  a  happy  in- 
stinct. It  is  scarcely  needful  to  quote  Burke's  memorable  words 
when  at  a  later  day  the  freedom  not  only  of  Virginia,  but  of  all 
her  sister  colonies,  was  threatened.  He  reminded  the  English 
Parliament,  that  "  The  great  contests  for  freedom  in  this  country 
were  from  the  earliest  times  chiefly  upon  the  question  of  taxing. 
.  .  .  On  this  point  of  taxes  the  ablest  pens  and  most  elo- 
quent tongues  have  been  exercised;  the  greatest  spirits  have 
acted  and  suffered."1  The  colonists  in  claiming  the  right  of 
taxation  were,  perhaps  unconsciously,  identifying  their  cause  with 
that  of  the  great  English  champions  of  liberty,  with  Pym  and 
Hampden ;  they  were  laying  a  foundation  for  the  work  of  Henry 
and  Washington. 

The  above  is  not  an  exhaustive  account  of  the  early  constitu- 
tional history  of  Virginia.  Other  questions  there  were  of  im- 
portance, notably  the  limits  of  the  franchise  and  the  length  of 
time  during  which  Assemblies  sat.  These,  however,  had  not  as 
yet  given  rise  to  any  dispute,  and  it  will  be  best  to  deal  with  them 
when  they  come  into  prominence  as  landmarks  in  the  history  of 
How  far  the  colony.  For  the  present  it  is  enough  to  say  that 
English       every  freeman  haiL^vote,  while  the  imperfect  state  of 

constitu-  .        '   ■." '      .     '  ii- 

tion:  anal-  the  early  records  leaves  us  ignorant  as  to  the  duration 
differences,  of  Assemblies.  The  above  summary  is  enough  to  show 
that  Virginia  enjoyed  a  constitution  closely  corresponding  in  its 
outward  form  with  that  of  the  mother  country,  but  differing  from 
it  in  one  or  two  important  points.  The  attitude  of  the  Burgesses 
to  the  crown  answered  nearly  to  that  of  the  House  of  Commons 
in  England.  The  Burgesses  claimed  the  control  of  the  purse, 
and  thus  exercised  the  same  power  which  the  English  Commons 
possessed,  before  the  Revolution  of.  1688  and  its  consequences 
had  given  them  a  practical  veto  on  the  choice  of  ministers. 
The  main  point  of  difference  lay  in  the  relations  between  the  two  j 
Houses,  or,  as  we  should  more  fitly  call  them,  the  two  orders. 

1  Burke's  speech  on  American  Taxation.     See  his  Works,  ed.  1826,  vol.  iii.  p.  5a 


220  VIRGINIA   UNDER  THE  COMMONWEALTH. 

I  The  Virginian  Council  answered  to  the  House  of  Lords  in  func- 
tions and  position,  but  not  in  formation.  In  one  feature  indeed 
the  constitution  of  the  Virginian  Council  resembled  that  of  the 
English  House  of  Peers.  It  was  an  oligarchy,  not  exclusively- 
hereditary  but  constantly  recruited  from  the  Commons,  and  as 
constantly  throwing  out  offshoots  to  be  absorbed  into  that  body. 
Such  a  system  is  a  preventive  of  many  of  the  worst  evils  of  an 
aristocracy.  It  hinders  the  formation  of  a  caste,  separated  from 
the  rest  of  the  community  by  special  and  exclusive  privileges. 
The  mutual  opposition  of  the  two  classes  is  thus  necessarily  soft- 
ened. No  peer  can  wish  for  the  total  and  permanent  depression 
of  an  order  to  which  his  own  descendants  will  belong.  A  com- 
moner can  scarcely  look  without  some  favor  on  privileges  which 
may  one  day  be,  to  himself  or  his  descendants,  the  highest  re- 
ward of  political  ambition. 

But,  while  the  English  House  of  Lords  is  thus  saved  from 
many  of  the  defects  of  an  hereditary  aristocracy,  the  partially 
hereditary  character  of  it  is  a  defense  against  other  evils.  It  can 
never  become  the  creature  of  the  crown ;  it  can  never  be  wholly 
identified  with  one  party  in  the  state,  or  with  one  set  of  princi- 
ples. In  Virginia  this  was  different.  There  the  aristocracy 
owed  its  existence  to  the  favor  of  the  king.  Moreover,  as  we 
have  seen,  the  members  of  it  enjoyed  as  such  substantial  pecun- 
iary advantages,  and  retained  among  themselves  most  of  the  chief 
state  offices.  Thus  we  have  in  the  colony  an  aristocracy  of  wealth 
dependent  on  the  crown  and  almost  coinciding  with  the  execu- 
tive. On  the  other  hand,  the  commonalty  was  in  some  respects 
in  a  better  position  than  in  England.  The  more  extended  suf- 
frage and  the  shorter  period  during  which  the  representative  body 
sat,  gave  the  Commons  a  more  immediate  and  more  efficacious 

/  means  of  making  its  wants  and  opinions  felt.  In  another  respect, 
too,  the  Virginian  House  of  Burgesses  was  more  powerful  than  an 
English  House  of  Commons.  The  Virginian  Burgesses  possessed 
the  same  check  on  the  Governor  and  the  Council  which  had  en- 
abled the  English  House  of  Commons  to  defy  a  Plantagenet  or 
a  Lancastrian  king.  Not  only  did  they  claim  the  control  of  the 
purse,  but,  what  was  far  more  important,  they  enjoyed  the  control 
of  the  sword.  Charles  I.  had  made  faint  efforts,  seconded  by 
Harvey  and  Berkeley,  to  establish  a  regular  army.  But  practi- 
cally the  population  of  Virginia  was,  like  the  population  of  Eng- 
land in  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries,  a  ready-made  militia, 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  PARLIAMENT.  221 

trained  in  habits  of  backwoods  warfare,  and  hardened  *by  a  prim- 
itive mode  of  life.  Here  then  we  have  the  materials  for  a  conflict 
between  two  sections  of  the  community,  each  with  an  organiza- 
tion, with  principles,  and  with  interests  of  its  own,  and  each 
ready  to  ally  itself  with  one  of  the  two  great  parties  marshaled 
against  one  another  in  England. 

When  the  demands  of  the  Parliament  and  the  mingled  stubborn- 
ness and  duplicity  of  the  king  had  made  war  inevitable,  it  at  first 
Position  seemed  as  though  the  aristocratic  influence  in  Virginia 
oftheVir-    wouid  outweigh  that  of  the  Commons  and  as  though 

ginian  °  ° 

Royalists,  the  colony  would  throw  in  its  lot  with  the  crown.  The 
government  of  Harvey,  and  still  more  that  of  Berkeley,  had 
served  to  favor  the  growth  of  royalist  principles  among  the  up- 
per classes.  The  whole  patronage  of  the  colony  was  in  the  hands 
of  the  king  and  of  his  representative  the  Governor,  and  we  may 
be  sure  that  neither  Harvey  nor  his  successor  omitted  to  use  that 
patronage  for  strengthening  his  own  influence  and  that  of  the 
crown. 

In  England  most  men  seem  to  have  believed  that  Virginia  was 
a  stronghold  of  the  royalists.1  Accordingly  it  was  soon  made 
Dealings  of tne  °bject  for  special  precautions.  In  1649  the  Par- 
withiament  nament  established  a  Board  of  Commissioners  for  the 
Virginia,  control  of  the  colonies,  with  the  Earl  of  Warwick  at 
its  head.2  This  was  little  more  than  a  continuation  of  the  exist- 
ing system,  inasmuch  as  ever  since  1634  the  government  of  the 
plantations  had  been  entrusted  to  a  special  commission,'  subject 
of  course  to  the  immediate  control  of  the  crown.3  In  asserting 
its  authority  over  them  the  Parliament  was  merely  discharging  one 
portion  of  that  sovereignty  of  which  it  claimed  the  whole.  The 
first  measure  taken  by  Parliament  in  dealing  with  the  colonies 
was  to  mark  off  Virginia,  together  with  Barbadoes  and  Maryland, 
as  objects  of  suspicion.  An  ordinance  was  passed  forbidding 
any  one  to  trade  with  these  three  colonies  without  a  license  from  Par- 
liament.4 We  need  not  look  upon  this  as  a  deliberate  act  of  com- 
mercial policy,  but  rather  as  a  special  measure  of  police.  Yet  at 
the  same  time  it  was  important  as  in  some  degree  asserting  the  . 
principle  that  the  commerce  of  the  colonies  was  a  legitimate  ob-  \ 
ject  for  parliamentary  control. 

1  "  More  was  expected  from  Virginia,  which  was  the  most  ancient  plantation,  and  so  was 
thought  to  be  better  provided  to  defend  itself  and  to  be  better  affected." — Clarendon,  cd. 
1706,  book  xiii.  p.  466. 

8  Hazard's  collection,  i.  533.  3  See  p.  198.  «  Hazard,  i.  637. 


222  VIRGINIA   UNDER  THE  COMMONWEALTH. 

The  conduct  of  the  Virginians  must  have  confirmed  the  ap- 
prehensions of  the  Parliament.  In  October,  1649,  immediately 
Reduftion  after  the  execution  of  the  king,  the  Assembly  passed  an 
colony.  act  declaring  that  all  commissions  derived  from  the 
crown  were  still  valid,  and  that  to  justify  the  recent  proceedings 
of  Parliament  was  to  be  post  factum  accessory  to  treason.  Who- 
ever should  "  go  about  by  unreverent  or  scandalous  words  or 
language  to  blast  the  memory  and  honour  of  the  late  most  pious 
king  (deserving  of  altars  and  monuments  in  the  hearts  of  all  good 
men),"  should  be  punished  at  the  discretion  of  the  Governor  and 
Council.  To  question  Charles  II. 's  right  of  succession,  or  to 
propose  a  change  of  Government,  was  made  high  treason.1  The 
Parliament  was  not  backward  in  meeting  this  threatened  re- 
sistance. Two  ships  were  sent  out  under  the  command  of  Dennis 
to  subdue  the  malignant  colony.  Of  the  details  of  the  contest 
we  know  little  more  than  the  one  fact  that  the  Virginian  royalists 
yielded  at  once,  without  a  blow  struck.  The  story  goes  that 
Dennis  while  at  sea  craftily  got  possession  of  a  quantity  of  goods 
belonging  to  leading  Virginians,  and  used  them  as  hostages 
wherewith  to  enforce  submission.2  This,  if  true,  is  a  strong 
illustration  of  what  the  whole  affair  amply  proves,  the  feeble  and 
lukewarm  nature  of  the  royalist  principles  in  Virginia. 

The  character  of  the  surrender  is  in  itself  enough  to  show  the 
mild  nature  of  the  struggle,  and  its  freedom  from  rancor.  Two 
Terms  of  agreements  were  made  with  the  Commissioners :  one  by 
surrender.  the  Governor  and  Council,  the  other  by  the  Burgesses. 
It  is  clear  from  the  tone  of  these  documents  that  the  former  body 
was  openly  and  avowedly  royalists,  the  latter  faithful  to  the  Par- 
liament. 

The  agreement  with  the  Governor  and  Council  was  a  total  sur- 
render on  their  part  of  all  political  status,  with  a  careful  reserva- 
tion of  the  rights  of  person  and  property.  A  general  indemnity 
was  granted  for  all  acts  hitherto  done  against  the  Parliament,  and 
a  year  of  grace  was  allowed  during  which  no  engagement  to 
the  Parliament  should  be  required  from  either  the  Governor  or 
any  member  of  the  Council,  and  in  which  they  might  dispose  of 
their  goods  and  depart  unmolested  whither  they  pleased.  Not 
only  was  security  of  person  granted,  "but  freedom  of  speech,  since 
it  was  specially  stipulated  that  the  Governor  and  Council  should 
not  be  censured  for  "speaking  well "  of  the  king,  nor  for  praying  for 

1  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  359.  2  Beverley,  p.  52. 


VIRGINIA  SURRENDERS.  223 

him  in  private  houses.  Berkeley  was  even  allowed  to  send  at  his 
own  cost  a  messenger  to  the  king  to  explain  the  circumstances  of 
the  surrender. 

The  agreement  between  the  Commissioners  and  the  Assembly 
was  almost  like  a  compact  between  equal  powers.  On  the  one 
hand  the  Assembly  undertook  to  remain  in  due  obedience  to  the 
Commonwealth  of  England.  In  return  they  stipulated  for  the 
following  conditions: — 1.  That  their  submission  was  to  be  ac-J 
knowledged  as  a  voluntary  act  and  not  a  conquest;  2.  That  they  ' 
should  enjoy  such  freedom  and  privileges  as  belong  to  the  people 
of  England;  3.  That  all  territorial  rights,  both  private  and  pub- 
lic, should  be  respected ;  that  the  extant  system  of  land  tenure 
should  be  continued ;  that  no  taxes  should  be  laid,  no  forts  or 
garrisons  maintained  without  the  consent  of  the  Assembly ;  that 
the  people  of  Virginia  should  have  the  same  commercial  rights 
towards  foreign  nations  as  those  granted  to  English-born  subjects, 
and  that  Virginia  should  enjoy  as  ample  privileges  as  any  other 
of  the  American  plantations.  Nor  was  the  Assembly  unmindful 
of  the  rights  of  the  defeated  party.  It  stipulated  for  terms  sim- 
ilar to  those  granted  to  the  Governor  and  Council,  namely,  an 
indemnity  for  all  acts  hitherto  done  against  the  Parliament,  and 
a  year  of  grace  in  which  all  adherents  of  the  king  might  settle 
their  affairs  and  leave  the  colony.1 

The  Burgesses  and  the  Parliamentary  Commissioners  then  held 
a  joint  sitting  for  the  settlement  of  affairs.  The  result  was  prac- 
increased  tically  a  complete  transfer  of  sovereignty  to  the  rep- 
S?rer  of  resentative  body.  To  it  was  handed  over  the  right  of  \ 
Assembly,  electing  all  officers,  including  the  Governor,  the  Coun-  *j~~ 
cil,  and  the  County  Commissioners.  At  the  same  time,  as  a  con- 
cession and  an  earnest  of  good-will,  the  Burgesses  waived  the 
right  of  election  for  the  present  occasion,  and  allowed  the  Par- 
liamentary Commissioners  to  nominate  a  Governor  and  Secretary. 
Their  choice  fell  on  Bennet  for  the  former,  Clayborne  for  the 
latter,  post.  At  the  time  the  Assembly  carefully  declared  that  the 
present  same  election  was  not  to  prejudice  the  rights  of  any  fut- 
ure Assembly.2 

For  the  next  ten  years  Virginia  entered  on  a  new  phase  of 
constitutional  life.  For  four  years  the  Assembly  was  elected  an- 
The  Navi-  nually ;  then,  without  any  visible  cause  for  the  change, 
Aft°n         one  sat  for  nearly  three  years.     The  Governor  and 

1  The  three  agreements  are  given  in  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  363.  *  lb.,  p.  372. 


2  24  VIRGINIA   UNDER  THE  COMMONWEALTH. 

Council  were  appointed  by  the  Assembly,  sometimes  for  one  year, 
sometimes  for  two.1  The  political  life  of  the  colony  seems  to 
have  flowed  on  tranquilly  under  the  new  system.  The  statute- 
books  bear  no  trace  of  any  change  in  the  system  or  the  principles 
of  legislation.  More  important  than  the  internal  politics  of  the 
colony  during  these  years  was  the  legislation  of  the  Parliament. 
To  the  Commonwealth  England  owes  the  establishment  of  that 
policy  which  for  more  than  a  century  determined  the  relations 
between  the  mother  country -and  her  colonies.  In  1650  Parlia- 
ment passed  a  measure,  re-enacted  in  an  enlarged  form  after  the 
Restoration,  and  then,  as  afterwards,  known  as  the  Navigation 
Act.2  The  one  clause  in  the  original  Act  which  concerned  the 
colonies  was  that  which  ordained  that  no  goods  should  be  carried 
thence  in  any  but  English  vessels,  and  which  thus  excluded  the 
colonists  from  the  benefits  of  the  foreign  market  and  debarred 

fthem  from  developing  a  carrying  trade  of  their  own.  In  consid- 
ering the  Navigation  Act  we  are  liable  to  two  errors.  We  should 
be  wrong  if  we  judged  it  either  by  the  events  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  or  by  the  political  theories  of  the  present  day.  The 
doctrine  that  the  community  is  most  benefited  when  its  means  of 
production  are  allowed  the  fullest  and  most  spontaneous  develop- 
ment, had  but  dawned  on  the  speculative  thinkers  of  the  seven- 
teenth century,  and  assuredly  no  reasonable  man  will  find  fault 
with  practical  statesmen  for  being  in  the  rear  of  theory.  Nor  is 
it  fair  to  blame  the  originators  of  the  system  embodied  in  this  Act 
for  the  evil  results  which  flowed  from  that  system  a  hundred  years 
later,  when  the  social  and  industrial  life  of  our  colonies  had  un- 
dergone great  changes.  Yet  even  after  these  deductions  we  can- 
not set  down  the  Navigation  Act  as  a  measure  of  undoubted  ex- 
pediency or  unmixed  wisdom.  In  subordinating  the  welfare  of 
the  colonies  to  the  commercial  prosperity  and  naval  greatness  of 
the  mother  country,  the  Long  Parliament  wa»  in  some  degree 
reverting  to  the  principles  of  the  sixteenth  century.  To  make 
England  the  centre  of  a  great  naval  empire  was  the  idea  ever 
present  to  the  minds  of  Gilbert  and  Raleigh  and  their  followers, 
and  the  colonization  of  America  was  mainly  valued  as  a  step 
towards  that  end.  Under  the  Stuarts  that  ambition  had  given 
way  before  meaner  views,  and,  like  the  foreign  policy  of  Eliza- 
beth, it  revived  under  the  sway  of  the  Protector.     But  though 

1  The  names  are  given  in  Hening. 

2  Parliamentary  History  (ed.  1808),  UL  1374. 


THE  NA  VI G  A  TION  A  CT.  2  2? 

the  principle  of  the  Navigation  Act  might  be  ambitious  and  ele- 
vated as  it  concerned  the  mother  country,  it  was  repressive  and 
blighting  in  its  effect  on  the  colonies.  In  the  middle  of  the  seven- 
teenth century,  indeed,  its  influence  was  but  slightly  felt.  It  did 
not  weigh  down  the  industry  of  the  colonies,  because  that  industry 
scarcely  existed,  but  it  hindered  the  development  of  it.  It  con- 
demned the  plantations  to  be,  commercially  at  least,  little  better 
than  factories  existing  for  the  benefit  of  English  trade.  Nor 
were  there  wanting  far-seeing  advocates,  who  anticipated  this  evil 
and  protested  against  it.  One  such  "remonstrance,  written  some 
twenty  years  later,  is  yet  extant,  and  puts  before  us  with  singular 
force  and  clearness  the  indirect  evils  to  be  feared.1  The  author's 
mastery  of  sound  economical  principles  is  clearly  shown  by  the 
manner  in  which  he  deals  with  the  whole  question  of  free  trade. 
England,  he  says,  excludes  the  Dutch  from  trading  with  the 
American  colonies  because  English  merchants  are  excluded  from 
the  Spice  Islands.  That  is,  because  the  Dutch  put  out  one  of 
their  own  eyes,  we  are  to  blind  ourselves  altogether.  But  his 
main  argument  is  the  injury  inflicted  on  the  future  of  the  colonies. 
Without  the  stimulus  of  foreign  commerce  there  will  be  neither 
an  extended  production  nor  any  encouragement  to  the  building 
of  towns.  The  writer  points  out  that  the  Dutch,  having  to  buy 
their  tobacco  in  English  markets,  with  the  added  cost  of  double 
customs  and  double  freight,  will  be  driven  to  grow  their  own. 
It  may  be  worse  in  quality,  but  Virginian  tobacco  is  worse  than 
Spanish,  and  yet  its  cheapness  secures  it  almost  a  monopoly  of 
the  English  market.  In  short,  the  policy  of  the  Navigation  Acty 
was  to  sacrifice  the  future  of  the  colonies  to  the  enrichment  oi 
the  English  merchant.  Happily,  however,  for  the  peaceful  reh 
tions  of  the  colonies  to  the  mother  country,  such  prescience  Wc 
not  general,  and  it  was  only  at  times  of  special  depression  that 
the  restrictions  on  trade  were  felt  to  be  oppressive. 

In  1658  the  tranquillity  of  the  colony  was  disturbed  by  a  grave 
constitutional  dispute,  the  first  which  had  marked  the  history  of 
Dispute  Virginia.  The  struggle  between  Harvey  and  the  As- 
between  sembly  had  been  brought  about  by  personal  causes,  by 
■Si  the"  tne  filings  of  the  Governor,  perhaps  in  some  measure 
Burgesses.2  ^  t^e  fajiingS  0f  his  opponents.     The  present  conflict 

1  This  is  a  printed  memorial  published  in  1676,  entitled  The  Humble  Remonstrance  of 
John  Bland  of  London,  Merchant,  on  the  Behalf  of  the  Inhabitants  and  Planters  in  Vir- 
ginia and  Maryland.     It  is  among  the  Colonial  Papers. 

8  Our  knowledge  of  these  disputes  is  exclusively  derived  from  Hening. 

is 


<cs£    LIBf?7 


226  VIRGINIA   UNDER  THE  COMMONWEALTH. 

was  brought  about  by  one  of  those  difficulties  for  which  the  con- 
stitution had  made  no  provision.  That  the  colony  was  in  a  state 
of  agitation  we  know,  though  it  seems  impossible  to  discover  the 
causes  and  the  nature  of  the  disturbance.  A  pamphlet  published 
in  1657,  of  which  nothing  seemingly  but  the  title  survives,  speaks 
of  "  the  present  sad  state  and  condition  of  the  English  colony  in 
Virginia." l 

In  1655  a  disfranchising  Act  had  been  passed  limiting  the 
right  of  voting  to  householders.2  In  the  autumn  of  that  year  it 
was  repealed  by  the  very  same  Assembly  which  had  passed  it,  on 
the  ground  that  it  was  "  something  hard  and  unagreeable  to 
reason  that  any  person  should  pay  equal  taxes  and  yet  have  no 
votes  in  election." 3  Here,  as  elsewhere  in  Virginian  history,  we 
feel  the  lack  of  private  letters  and  memoirs  which  might  throw 
light  on  the  spirit  and  temper  which  underlay  the  formal  pro- 
ceedings of  parties. 

In  1658  the  struggle  openly  began.  A  fresh  Assembly  was 
elected  which  took  upon  itself  the  task  of  revising  and  consoli- 
dating the  laws  of  the  colony.  The  result  of  this  was  a  set  of 
Acts,  one  hundred  and  thirty  in  number,  containing  no  new  mat- 
ter, but  embodying  all  the  legislation  of  previous  Assemblies,  and 
intended,  like  that  legislation,  not  to  be  an  independent  code, 
)but  to  supplement  the  laws  of  England  according  to  the  special 
/needs  of  the  colony.4  When  this  task  had  been  accomplished 
I  the  Governor  and  Council  formally  dissolved  the  Assembly.  This 
the  Burgesses,  whether  rightly  or  not,  considered  as  an  infringe- 
ment of  their  privileges.  Whether  this,  as  it  was  the  ostensible, 
was  also  in  reality  the  sole,  cause  of  the  contest  which  followed, 
is  uncertain.  But  as  the  Governor  and  Council  were  themselves 
the  nominees  of  the  Burgesses,  we  can  hardly  suppose  that  the 
dispute  turned  on  any  definite  division  of  parties,  or  that  the  com- 
batants were  Cavaliers  and  Roundheads  respectively.  If  there 
was  any  cause  for  the  quarrel  beyond  the  special  question  at  issue, 
it  was  probably  of  a  personal  character,  or  had  originated  acci- 
dentally on  some  point  of  procedure. 

1  The  pamphlet  is  entitled  Public  Good  without  Private  Interest,  or  a  Compendious  Re- 
monstrance of  the  Present  Sad  State  and  Condition  of  the  English  Colony  in  Virguria. 
London,  1657,  4 to.  The  title  is  given  in  Lownde's  Bibliographer's  Manual.  I  can  no- 
where find  the  pamphlet  itself. 

2  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  412. 

1  lb. ,  p.  403.     By  an  accident,  the  proceedings  of  this  Assembly  are  inserted  out  of  their 
place  in  Hening,  after  those  of  November,  1655. 
*  lb.,  p.  433. 


VICTORY  OF  THE  BURGESSES.  227 

Although  the  Burgesses  from  the  outset  took  up  a  resolute 
attitude  of  resistance,  their  policy  at  first  was,  or  seemed  to  be,  in 
some  measure  conciliatory.  They  proposed  a  resolution  for  the 
acceptance  of  the  Governor  and  Council,  to  the  effect  that  the 
House  remain  undissolved  in  order  that  a  speedy  period  might 
be  put  to  public  affairs.  The  Council  not  unnaturally  interpreted 
this  as  a  conditional  surrender,  and  replied  that  they  would  with- 
draw the  order  for  dissolution,  upon  receiving  a  promise  of  the 
speedy  conclusion  of  business.  At  the  same  time  they  proposed 
to  refer  the  general  constitutional  question  of  the  power  of  disso- 
lution to  the  Lord  Protector.  From  this  it  is  clear  that  if  the 
dispute  was  due  to  a  revival  of  Royalist  principles,  those  princi- 
ples were  to  be  found  among  the  Burgesses,  and  that  the  change 
had  not  extended  to  the  Governor  and  Council. 

The  Burgesses  refused  to  accept  this  compromise.  They  ap- 
pointed a  committee  to  draw  up  a  report  in  their  own  defense 
and  to  guard  against  any  wavering  within  their  own  body.  The 
committee  also  administered  an  oath  to  the  Governor  and  Coun- 
cil pledging  them  to  act  in  accordance  with  their  consciences 
and  the  law  of  England.  The  Council  appear  to  have  acqui- 
esced quietly  in  their  defeat,  and  the  Assembly  dissolved  itself, 
having  established  the  perilous  and  somewhat  contradictory 
doctrines  of  popular  sovereignty  with  an  unlimited  tenure  of 
power  vested  in  the  popular  representatives  of  the  Commons. 

In  March,  1659,  another  Assembly  was  elected,  animated,  as  it 
would  seem,  by  the  same  independent  and  overbearing  temper. 
Decline  of  The  ^rst  act  °^  ^is  body  was  to  appoint  the  Council 
common  ^or  ^e'X  ^is  looks  like  the  desperate  attempt  of  a 
wealth.  party  which  might  soon  be  in  a  minority  to  perpetu- 
ate, as  far  as  it  could,  its  threatened  hold  on  power.  The  events 
of  the  last  twelve  months  might  well  have  convinced  the  Virginian 
Roundheads  that  their  time  was  short.  The  succession  of 
Richard  Cromwell  had  been  peacefully  accepted.  But  by  the 
spring  of  1659  it  was  clear  that  the  supremacy  of  the  Common- 
wealth, so  far  as  it  rested  on  the  hereditary  claims  of  the  second 
Lord  Protector,  was  imperiled.  By  the  summer  the  overthrow 
of  Richard  and  the  establishment  of  the  Council  of  State  were 
causing  that  revival  of  royalist  hopes  which  led  to  the  rising  in 
Cheshire  under  Booth  and  Middleton.  When  the  time  came  for 
the  election  of  another  Assembly,  Monk  was  holding  London, 

1  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  517- 


228  VIRGINIA   UNDER  THE  COMMONWEALTH. 

t  and  Dublin  had  returned  to  its  allegiance.  The  Virginian  Royal- 
ists might  not  know  how  assured  was  the  triumph  of  their  cause, 
but  we  may  be  sure  that  they  knew  enough  to  inspire  them  with 
fresh  hopes. 

The  choice  of  representatives  unluckily  tells  us  but  little.  The 
majority  of  the  names  were  new,  but  this  proves  nothing,  as  we 
Berkeley  find  the  same  tendency  to  a  complete  change  during 
Swerno?.  the  tranquil  times  of  the  Commonwealth.  This  is  only 
natural  in  a  community  like  Virginia,  where  the  habits  of  the  peo- 
ple make  attendance  at  the  seat  of  government  both  troublesome 
and  costly,  and  where  there  is  little  in  the  career  of  a  representa- 
tive to  stimulate  political,  social,  or  intellectual  ambition.  But 
whatever  may  have  been  its  composition,  the  proceedings  of  this 
Assembly  leave  no  doubt  as  to  the  temper  in  which  it  met.  It 
clearly  contemplated  the  probability  of  a  restoration,  while  at  the 
same  time  it  approached  the  subject  in  a  thoroughly  cautious  and 
temperate  manner.  This  was  well  illustrated  by  its  first  measure. 
This  provided  that  during  the  unsettled  state  of  things  in  Eng- 
land, the  supreme  power  of  the  colony  should  be  vested  in  the 
Assembly,  and  that  all  Acts  should  issue  in  that  name  till  some 
lawful  authority  should  appear  from  England.  The  leanings  of 
the  Assembly  towards  the  restoration  of  the  monarchy  were 
shown  by  its  choice  of  Berkeley  for  Governor,  At  the  same  time 
it  imposed  on  him  three  conditions,  all  manifestly  intended  to 
strengthen  the  hands  of  the  Burgesses  and  to  check  any  exercise 
of  arbitrary  authority  by  the  Governor.  These  conditions  bound 
the  Governor  to  call  an  Assembly  every  two  years  or  often er,  to 
■choose  a  Secretary  of  State  with  the  approval  of  the  Assembly, 
.and  not  to  dissolve  the  Assembly  without  the  consent  of  the 
Burgesses.1 

To  confirm  the  authority  thus  asserted,  an  Act  was  passed  de- 
claring all  persons  who  should  refuse  to  obey  the  Assembly  pub- 
lic enemies,  and  threatening  them  with  punishment  as  such. 

After  making  these  provisions  for  further  peace  and  freedom, 
the  Assembly  proceeded  with  its  ordinary  administrative  and  leg- 
islative functions.  The  only  noteworthy  measure  in  these  was  a 
bill,  formidably  entitled  an  Act  for  the  Annihilation  of  the  Coun- 
cilors, formally  repealing  the  law  by  which  the  post  of  Council- 
or had  lately  been  made  a  life  appointment.  Finally,  the  Assem- 
bly adjourned  till  October,  leaving  the  Governor,  however,  at 
liberty  to  summon  it  earlier  if  necessary. 

1  For  all  these  proceedings  see  Hening  for  1659-60. 


RESTORA  TION  OF  THE  MONARCHY. 


229 


In  October  the  Assembly  again  met  and  peaceably  accepted 
the  restored  monarchy.  Berkeley  was  formally  described  in  the 
record  of  proceedings  as  "  the  king's  Governor,"  while  the  day 
the  late  king's  execution  was  declared  a  public  fast,  and  that  of 
the  Restoration  a  day  of  rejoicing. 

Apparently  the  solemn  acceptance  of  the  new  order  of  things 
was  the  only  purpose  for  which  this  Assembly  met.  It  made  no 
laws,  and  confined  its  business  to  passing  orders  analogous  to  the 
Private  Acts  of  an  English  Parliament. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION.1 

a  The  overthrow  of  the  royal  authority  had  been  achieved  with- 
out bloodshed  and,  as  it  would  seem,  even  without  rancor,  and 
Change  of  tne  same  moderation  and  tranquillity  marked  the  Res- 
system,  toration.  But  though  that  event  brought  no  definite 
and  declared  change  in  the*- condition  of  Virginia,  yet  it  clearly 
marks  an  epoch  in  the  relations  of  the  mother  country  to  this  and 
the  other  dependencies.  The  restored  monarchy  carried  on  the 
policy  of  the  Commonwealth  in  dealing  with  the  colonies  as  a  spec- 
ial department  of  the  state.  In  1662  a  commission  was  issued  to 
'thirty-four  members  of  the  Privy  Council  constituting  them  a 
Council  for  Forjdga  Plantations.  The  nature  and  limits  of  their 
functions  was  distinctly  laid  down  in  their  instructions.  It  was 
their  duty  to  supervise  the  government  of  all  the  colonies,  to  ac- 
quaint themselves  with  their  commercial  and  political  condition, 
their  revenue  and  means  of  defense.  They  were  as  far  as  might 
be  to  combine  the  whole  body  of  colonies  into  an  organized 
whole,  dependent  on  the  mother  country  and  contributing  to  her 
wealth.  For  this  purpose  they  were  to  make  special  inquiry  as 
to  the  government  of  dependencies  by  other  nations.  The  due 
execution  of  the  Navigation  Act  and  the  supply  of  servile  labor 

1  Our  material  now  for  the  first  time  becomes  embarrassing  from  its  very  abundance.  After 
the  Restoration,  letters  from  leading  Virginians  to  public  men  in  England  are  far  more  fre- 
quent than  before,  and  these,  together  with  pamphlets,  official  reports,  and  instructions  to 
governors,  furnish  us  with  ample  means  of  judging  of  the  general  condition  of  the  colony. 
As  we  approach  the  revolution  of  1688,  Beverley's  History  of Virginia  begins  to  be  valuable. 
The  author  was  a  rich  Virginian  planter.  His  father  emigrated  before  1676,  and  took  a  promi- 
nent, and  not  always  creditable,  part  in  the  troubles  of  that  year.  Accordingly,  the  son's 
statements  probably  represent,  if  not  his  own  experiences,  at  least  the  oral  tradition  of  eye- 
witnesses. The  authorities  for  Bacon's  rebellion  deserve  a  special  note.  I  should  mention 
that,  examining  the  papers  for  this  period,  I  have  been  much  indebted  to  Mr.  Sainsbury  for 
kindly  allowing  me  the  use  of  his  MS.  calendar,  now  in  process  of  publication. 
230 


RE  VIVA L  OF  COL ONIZA  TION.  2 3 1 

to  the  colonial  market  were  both  to  form  subjects  of  attention, 
while  the  latter  was  to  be  so  arranged  as  to  relieve  England  of 
its  surplus  population.  Nor  was  the  internal  welfare  of  the  plan- 
tations themselves,  and  their  religious  and  moral  discipline,  to  be 
overlooked. 

The  temper  of  the  age  gave  a  quickening  spirit  to  these  forms. 
Historians  have  hardly  done  justice  to  that  outburst  of  energy 
Fresh  anc*  activity  which  marked  the  colonial  history  of  the 

interest  in  vears  immediately  following  the  Restoration.  We 
tion.  shan  see  it  fully  displayed  at  a  later  stage  of  our  sub- 

ject in  the  revived  spirit  of  colonial  enterprise  which  founded 
Carolina,  Pennsylvania,  and  New  Jersey,  and  which,  by  the  con- 
quest of  New  York,  gave  England  a  continuous  Atlantic  sea- 
board. In  the  older  colonies,  too,  the  results  of  this  spirit  could 
be  plainly  traced.  In  New  England  it  led  to  an  amount  of  in- 
terference and  to  a  state  of  ill-feeling  which  well-nigh  rent  asunder 
the  colonies  from  the  mother  country,  and  might  have  anticipated 
in  a  narrow  and  imperfect  form,  the  achievement  of  American  in- 
dependence. In  Virginia,  as  in  the  West  Indies,  we  trace  the 
new  system  in  the  almost  constant  supervision  of  colonial  affairs 
by  the  authorities  at  home.  Everything  of  importance  in  the 
colony  is  reported,  examined,  and  commented  upon  by  the  Coun- 
cil. And  it  must  be  said  in  justice  to  those  under  whose  control 
the  colonies  fell,  that  this  supervision  was  for  the  most  part  in- 
telligent, and  that  the  colonists  were  not  abandoned,  as  at  a  later 
day,  to  the  greed  of  place-hunters  or  the  caprice  of  factions. 
There  are  few  bright  spots  in  the  government  of  Charles  II.,  but 
the  historian. of  the  colonies  may  at  least  be  thankful  that  he  has 
to  deal  only  with  its  better  aspects. 

The  instructions  sent  out  to  Berkeley  in  the  following  year 
(the  Restoration)  show  no  definite  change  in  the  system  of  col- 
Berkeiey's  onial  administration.1  At  the  same  time  there  is  a  de- 
tions?c"  tailed  precision  about  them  which  proves  that  hence- 
forth the  English  government  would  exercise  a  more  minute 
supervision,  and  that  the  Virginians  would  no  longer  enjoy  that 
amount  of  self-government  which  had  hitherto  been  permitted  to 
them.  Berkeley  is  specially  instructed  to  send  home  an  annual 
report,  and  henceforth  we  have  a  mass  of  continuous  official  cor- 
respondence, which  furnishes  ample  material  for  the  history  of 
the  colony.     The  most  noteworthy  point  in  Berkeley's  instructions 

1  Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  lxxix.  p.  265. 


232  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

was  an  injunction  to  maintain  Divine  worship,  according  to  the 
forms  of  the  Church  of  England,  to  keep  churches  in  good  repair, 
and  to  add  to  their  number. 

The  old  difficulties  come  up  again.  Towns  are  to  be  built  on 
the  various  rivers,  and  plantation  of  tobacco  is  to  be  limited,  in 
such  manner  as  may  seem  best  to  the  colonists.  New  indus- 
tries, the  production  of  iron,  flax,  hemp,  and  pitch,  are  to  be  en- 
couraged. 

It  is  clear  that  the  Civil  War  had  left  few  scars  behind  it. 
The  Act  of  Indemnity  is  extended  to  the  colony  with  the  same 
specific  exceptions  as  in  England,  and  all  Acts  of  the  Assembly 
passed  during  the  time  of  the  Commonwealth  are  to  be  repealed. 
This  was  done,  but  nearly  all  the  Acts  of  substantial  importance 
were  re-enacted. 

'  The  political  and  economical  condition  of  the  colony  might 
well  have  seemed  enviable  to  those  who  remembered  the  evil 
Discontent  days  of  struggle  and  suffering  which  followed  the  mas- 
ness!1"6381"  sacre.  In  the  twenty  years  which  preceded  the  Restor- 
ation the  population  had  multiplied  nearly  fourfold.1  In  spite  of 
restrictions  the  export  trade  had  steadily  increased.  So  friendly 
were  the  relations  with  the  Indians  that  the  very  possibility  of 
danger  seemed  to  be  forgotten.  The  Virginian  settler,  however, 
was  not  destined  to  sink  into  a  state  of  political  torpor.  There  is 
indeed  in  races  trained  to  freedom  a  wholesome  principle  of  dis- 
content never  long  dormant,  which  saves  them  from  many  of  the 
dangers  of  a  tranquil  and  inactive  prosperity.  It  was  but  natural 
that  when  the  horrors  of  the  wilderness  and  the  perils  from  In- 
dians and  wild  beasts  were  first  overcome,  the  colonists  should 
be  carried  away  by  the  enjoyment  of  their  newly- won  happiness. 
Hence  came  that  pervading  tone  of  content  and  satisfaction 
which  we  trace  in  the  annals  of  Virginia  during  the  period  which 
we  have  already  surveyed.  That  however  could  not  last.  As 
the  memory  of  early  hardships  and  difficulties  died  away,  so  the 
settlers  became  aware  of  defects  in  the  social  and  political  sys- 
tem, defects  which  had  been  willingly  overlooked  in  the  presence 
of  rapidly-increasing  prosperity.  Shortcomings  in  the  social  state 
of  the  colony,  the  accumulation  of  land  in  a  few  hands,  the  lack 
of  towns,  of  schools,  and  of  churches,  all  began  to  be  felt,  and 
even  if  not  laid  directly  to  the  charge  of  the  government,  served 

1  Berkeley,  in  a  letter  to  Arlington,  1665,  August  1,  sets  the  population  of  the  colony  at 
forty  thousand. 


RESTRICTIONS  ON  COMMERCE.  233 

to  swell  the  general  sense  of  discontent.  The  political  atmos- 
phere was  full  of  thunder.  Besides  a  general  and  vague  feeling 
of  dissatisfaction,  there  were  specific  grievances,  some  of  them 
defects  in  the  original  constitution,  some  abuses  which  had  grad- 
ually crept  in,  some  due  to  temporary  and  personal  causes. 

During  the  ten  years  which  followed  the  Restoration,  the  only 
symptom  of  this  discontent  was  an  abortive  plot  headed  by  one 
Birkenhead,  an  old  Commonwealth  soldier.1  The  hopeless  failure 
of  this  attempt  only  served  to  illustrate  the  prevailing  loyalty  of 
the  colony.  But  just  as  in  the  mother  country  that  passionate 
outburst  of  loyal  feeling  which  accompanied  the  Restoration  gave 
way  before  the  mingled  folly  and  wrong-doing  of  the  king  and 
his  counselors,  so  was  it  in  Virginia.  There,  however,  the  evils 
caused  by  the  personal  character  of  the  rulers  were  largely  min- 
gled with  others  due  to  the  political  and  industrial  condition  of 
the  colony. 

In  its  legislation  for  the  commerce  of  the  colonies,  the  first  Par- 
liament of  Charles  II.  followed  the  precedent  of  the  Common- 
Restric-  wealth,  but  with  increased  stringency.  It  re-enacted 
commerce,  the  provision  that  all  colonial  produce  should  be  ex- 
ported in  English  vessels.2  To  this  it  added  two  important 
clauses.  The  first  forbade  any  man  to  establish  himself  as  a  mer- 
chant or  factor  in  the  colonies.  The  second  enumerated  various 
articles  as  the  staples  of  colonial  produce,  and  provided  that  none 
of  these  should  be  exported  save  to  England  or  to  the  depend- 
encies of  the  English  crown.  Later  statutes  went  yet  farther  in 
the  same  direction.  In  1663  it  was  enacted  that  the  colonists 
should  receive  no  goods' whatever  in  foreign  vessels.3  Thus  the 
colonists  were  virtually  excluded  from  any  benefit  from  the  for- 
eign market,  and  were  left  dependent  on  the  mother  country  for 
the  sale  of  all  their  more  valuable  exports  and  for  their  imported 
supplies.  All  that  was  permitted  beyond  this  was  the  limited  ex- 
port trade  in  a  few  specially  exempted  commodities  and  the  com- 
merce between  the  different  colonies.  Even  this  last  was  checked 
by  an  act  passed  in  1672,  imposing  on  all  goods  exported  from 
colony  to  colony  the  same  duties  as  they  would  have  paid  if  sold 
in  England.4 

Of  the  practical  effect  of  these  restrictions  on  Virginia  I  have 
already  said  something.      In   time  of  prosperity  the  colonists 

1  Very  little  is  known  of  this  plot.     It  is  scarcely  mentioned  in  contemporary  documents, 
and  our  only  definite  knowledge  of  it  is  derived  from  Beverley, 
i  13  Car.  II.  14.  «  15  Car.  II.  17.  *  25  Car.  II.  6. 


234  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORA  TION. 

could  bear  them.  In  time  of  depression  they  felt  that  their  wel- 
fare was  being  sacrificed  for  the  enrichment  of  the  English  mer- 
chant. This  feeling  was  intensified  by  the  belief  that  the  New 
En  glanders  evaded  these  restrictions  by  smuggling,  while  the 
loyal  colonists  of  Virginia  were  impoverished  by  an  obedience 
which  brought  them  no  compensating  gain. 

Yet  it  must  be  said  in  justice  to  the  English  government  that 
there  is  no  reason  to  think  that  the  Virginians  would  under  a 
more  liberal  system  have  developed  any  export  trade  beyond 
that  of  tobacco.  Indeed,  the  government,  in. its  anxiety  to  stim- 
ulate other  industries,  remitted  for  a  period  of  five  years  all  duties 
on  pitch,  hemp,  and  tar  imported  from  Virginia  into  England.1 
Berkeley,  too,  seems  to  have  been  fully  alive  to  the  importance 
of  such  industries,  and  to  have  done  his  best  to  encourage  these 
commodities  and  to  introduce  the  production  and  manufacture 
of  silk.  Presents  of  silk  were  occasionally  sent  over  to  England,2 
and  it  is  even  said,  though  on  doubtful  authority,  that  Charles 
II.  wore  such  a  robe  at  his  coronation.3  As,  however,  in  the 
days  of  the  Company,  the  attempt  failed,  and  the  prosperity  of 
the  colony  was  left  to  depend  on  its  tobacco  trade. 

That  form  of  industry  continued  to  be  beset  by  difficulties, 
and  these  were  increased  by  the  fact  that  Maryland  and  Caro- 
Difficuities  lina  were  now  rival  producers.  As  we  have  seen,  the 
tobacco.  Virginian  legislature  had  at  length  worked  out  a  sys- 
tem which  seemed  to  act  as  a  satisfactory  check  on  overproduc- 
tion and  on  the  growth  of  inferior  sorts.  This  system,  however, 
now  failed,  inasmuch  as  it  was  impossible  to  induce  Maryland  to 
act  in  co-operation.  This  was  partly  due  to  the  difference  be- 
tween the  climate  of  the  two  colonies.  An  arrangement,  such' as 
obtained  in  Virginia,  prohibiting  all  tobacco-planting  afters  cer- 
tain date,  would  have  acted  unfairly  in  Maryland,  where  the  sea- 
sons were  about  a  fortnight  later.  Attempts  were  then  made  to 
persuade  the  Commissioners  for  Plantations  to  forbid  all  expor- 
tation for  a  year  except  during  a  limited  period.  The  proprie- 
tor of  Maryland,  Lord  Baltimore,  sagaciously  pointed  out  that 
this  would  bear  hardly  on  the  small  planter  who  lived  from  hand 
to  mouth  and  depended  for  his  subsistence  on  the  immediate 
sale  of  his  crop,  and  the  Commissioners  wisely  refused  to  enter- 
tain the  proposal.4  \ 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1664,  November  25. 

2  There  are  several  references  to  these  in  Berkeley's  letters.  3  Beverley,  p.  55. 

4  The  documents  bearing  on  this  are  to  be  found  in  the  Colonial  Papers.  The  most  im- 
portant of  them  is  a  very  ably  written  memorial  from  Lord  Baltimore. 


\NA  VAL  A  TTA  CKS  B  Y  THE  D  UTCH.  235 

Overproduction  and  the  competition  of  his  brother-colonists 
were  not  the  only  evils  to  which  the  Virginian  tobacco-planter 
Attacks  was  now  exposed.  The  colonies,  like  the  mother 
Dutch.6  country,  were  doomed  to  suffer  from  that  base  and 
hateful  policy  which  had  entangled  England  in  a  war  with  the 
Dutch  Republic.  That  ill-starred  struggle  against  a  nation  akin 
to  us  in  race  and  religion  brought  no  triumphs  in  its  train,  and 
the  colonists  were  the  guiltless  partners  of  our  dishonor.  To 
carry  a  cargo  of  Virginian  tobacco  safely  past  the  Dutch  priva- 
teers became  a  service  of  danger.  In  1667  the  evil  went  yet  a 
step  farther.  A  British  ship  of  war  had  been  told  off  to  guard 
the  merchantmen  that  were  lying  in  Chesapeake  Bay.  The  whole 
affair  was  a  humiliating  comment  on  the  condition  of  the  English 
navy  at  that  day.  The  guard-ship,  the  Elizabeth,  was  refitting, 
and  her  captain,  it  was  said,  was  on  shore  amusing  himself  at  a 
wedding  in  the  company  of  his  mistress.  The  merchant  vessels, 
instead  of  being  anchored  near  Jamestown,  where  they  could  be 
defended  by  the  guns  of  the  town,  were  imprudently  lying  out  in 
the  bay.  There  three  Dutch  vessels  fell  upon  them.  One  mer- 
chantman alone  resisted.  Her  captain,  according  to  his  own 
account,  fought  single-handed  for  six  hours  before  he  gave  way. 
The  Dutch  then  sailed  up  the  river,  and  finding  the  Elizabeth 
defenseless,  boarded  and  burned  her.  They  then  destroyed 
seven  merchant  vessels  and  captured  thirteen  more.  There  were 
still  some  merchantmen  lying  at  the  mouth  of  the  York  River. 
The  planters,  with  that  headlong  courage  in  which  few  Virginians 
ever  failed,  wished  to  man  them  and  attack  the  Dutch,  but  the 
masters  refused.  For  this  they  were  greatly  blamed  by  the  plant- 
ers ;  but  we  may  well  believe  they  were  justified  in  distrusting  the 
undisciplined  courage  of  landsmen.1 

Six  years  later  another  and  a  more  formidable  attack  was  made 
with  eight  men-of-war.2  The  result,  however,  was  less  disastrous, 
as  only  eleven  ships  appear  to  have  been  destroyed.  In  1674 
the  peace  with  Holland  relieved  the  colonists  from  a  trouble 
which  it  seemed  wholly  beyond  their  power  to  check  or  remedy. 

The  danger  of  Dutch  hostilities  brought  political  disaffection 
in  its  train.  Instructions  were  sent  out  by  the  English  govern- 
Dispute  ment  for  the  fortification  of  Cape  Comfort,  a  point 
forts.  nearly  forty  miles  below  Jamestown.     Nearly  all  the 

1  This  affair  is  described  in  an  official  report  from  Berkeley,  and  in  a  letter  from  Ludwell  to 
Arlington,  1667,  June  24. 
*  This  is  told  in  a  letter  from  Ludwell  to  the  Commissioners  for  Plantations,  1673,  August 


236  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

colonists,  including  Berkeley  and  his  chief  advisers,  were  opposed 
to  this  scheme.  They  pointed  out  that  the  spot  was  ill-suited 
for  a  fort,  badly  supplied  with  water,  and  swarming  with  mosqui- 
toes. Moreover,  the  river  was  so  wide  at  that  point  that  one 
fort  would  be  unable  to  command  the  whole  passage.  Never- 
theless the  Bristol  merchants  who  traded  with  Virginia  pressed 
the  scheme  strongly,  and  a  long  correspondence  between  the 
colonists  and  the  authorities  at  home  followed.  The  scheme, 
though  not  formally  abandoned,  was  not  thoroughly  carried  out. 
By  way  of  compromise,  a  small  wooden  fort  was  erected.  Even 
this  put  the  colony  to  considerable  cost  for  the  transport  of  ord- 
nance, and  served  as  an  additional  grievance  at  a  time  when 
every  public  burden  was  severely  felt.1 

In  this  time  of  trouble  the  forces  of  nature  contributed  to 
increase  the  sufferings  of  the  unhappy  colonists.  The  very  same 
The  letters  which  brought  home  the  news  of  the  Dutch  at- 

hurricane.  tack  reported  a  hurricane,  by  which,  it  is  said,  no  less 
than  ten  thousand  houses  had  been  destroyed.  Maryland,  it  was 
added,  had  been  afflicted  in  the  same  way,  but  with  half  the  loss. 
It  is  scarcely  credible  that  in  a  population  of  forty  thousand  such 
destruction  could  have  taken  place.  Still  such  a  statement  must 
have  had  a  substantial  basis  of  truth  underlying  it.  We  may 
pretty  safely  infer  from  it  that  all  except  the  more  substantial 
planters  lived  in  slightly  built  huts,  little  better,  probably,  than 
those  of  the  West  Indian  negros  at  the  present  day.2 

The  prevailing  discontent  which  resulted  from  these  various 
causes  was  intensified  by  the  personal  character  of  the  Governor. 
Berkeley's  There  was  nothing  in  Berkeley's  previous  career  to 
character.  make  him  specially  hostile  even  to  those  Virginians 
who  had  supported  the  Commonwealth,  or  specially  enthusiastic 
on  behalf  of  the  restored  dynasty.  Yet  he  seems  to  have  re- 
turned an  imbittered  and  vindictive  man,  remembering  only  the 
wrongs  of  himself  and  his  party.  Naturally,  as  it  would  seem, 
frank  and  loyal  to  his  word,  he  was  more  than  once  betrayed  by 
his  wayward  and  revengeful  temper  into  breaches  of  faith.  More- 
over, though  the  character  of  an  old  Cavalier  soldier  might  pal- 
liate hastiness  and  occasional  violence,  it  ill  assorted  with  the 
charges  of  petty  corruption  which  were  brought  against  Berkeley. 

1  The  objections  to  the  forts  are  set  forth  in  a  letter  from  Berkeley  to  Arlington,  1666,  July 
13,  and  in  a  letter  from  Ludwell  to  Arlington,  July  18. 

2  The  hurricane  is  also  referred  to  in  a  letter  from  Boston,  Oct.  16,  1667. 


THE  LONG  ASSEMBLY.  237 

Even  the  best  side  of  his  policy,  his  treatment  of  the  Indians, 
admitted  of  an  unfavorable  construction,  and  it  was  commonly 
thought  that  the  forbearance  and  moderation  of  the  Governor 
were  due  less  to  his  sense  of  justice  than  to  the  profit  which  he 
and  his  friends  derived  from  the  beaver  trade.1 

This  lowered  tone  of  morality  was  not  confined  to  a  single 
public  man.  No  one  can  read  the  annals  of  the  time  and  not 
want  of  feel  that  the  political  atmosphere  was  full  of  venality 
morality,  and  corruption.  The  smaller  public  offices  were  con- 
stantly turned  into  sources  of  unrighteous  gain.  The  transfer  of 
land  was  rendered  costly  by  the  multiplication  of  official  fees. 
The  wages  paid  to  members  of  the  Assembly  were  exorbitant,  \ 
and  were  increased  by  various  illegitimate  allowances.  Frugal- 
ity in  the  management  of  public  business  was  neglected,  and  the 
committees  of  the  Assembly  chose  to  meet  at  an  alehouse  rather 
than  at  the  court-house  itself.2 

This  corruption  and  extravagance  was  accompanied  by  a  gen- 
eral relaxation  in  public  morality.  The  letters  even  of  the  better 
class  of  men  among  the  colonists  breath?  a  despicable  tone  of 
servility.  Arlington  is  repeatedly  addressed  both  by  Berkeley  t 
and  by  the  secretary,  Ludwell,  as  if  the  whole  well-being  of  the 
writer  and  of  the  colony  itself  depended  on  the  pleasure  of  the 
minister.  In  the  loss  of  independence  and  self-respect  Virginia 
had  kept  pace  with  the  mother  country. 

Meanwhile  the  Virginians  were  deprived  of  that  which  ought 
to  have  been  the  natural  safety-valve  for  their  discontent.  In 
The  Long  England  the  exaggerated  spirit  of  loyalty  which  fol- 
Assembiy.  lowed  the  Restoration  was  at  once  signalized  and  un- 
dermined by  a  session  of  Parliament  which  lasted  for  eighteen 
years.  It  is  hard  to  say  how  far  a  like  state  of  things  in  Virginia 
was  due  to  a  like  cause,  how  far  to  the  selfish  determination  of  a 
class  to  monopolize  power.  Be  the  cause  what  it  might,  the  As- 
sembly strictly  followed  the  example  of  the  English  Parliament  JL 
by  continuing  to  sit  till  1676,  and  then  only  yielded  to  a  violent 
display  of  popular  feeling. 

Meanwhile  it  was  shown  by  many  indications  that  the  repre- 

1  These  charges  against  Berkeley  are  to  be  found  scattered  among  the  records  of  the  time 
in  private  letters  and  in  pamphlets,  and  are  also  confirmed  by  some  of  his  official  acts.  One 
of  the  severest  attacks  on  him  is  made  incidentally  by  a  Maryland  Puritan,  in  a  long  and  vig- 
orously written  manifesto,  to  which  I  shall  have  occasion  to  refer  hereafter. 

2  The  evidence  for  the  general  laxity  of  morals  is  much  the  same  as  that  for  Berkeley's 
shortcomings.  The  proceedings  of  the  reforming  Assembly  in  1676  are  a  good  proof  of  the 
nature  of  the  mischief  itself. 


2,8  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

sentatives  were  wholly  out  of  harmony  with  their  constituents. 
Popular  grievances  went  unheeded.  Indeed  the  Assembly  itself, 
through  its  extravagance  and  its  corruption,  was  the  main  griev- 
ance of  all,  The  colonists  felt  that  they  were  mocked  with  the 
nominal  enjoyment  of  free  institutions,  while  in  truth  they  had 
lost  all  control  over  the  conduct  of  those  who  professedly  repre- 
sented them. 

The  discontent  which  was  thus  engendered  by  internal  corrup- 
tion was  suddenly  stimulated  by  an  attack  from  without.  In  the 
The  king's  very  first  year  of  his  nominal  reign,  Charles  II.  had 
Virginia,  rewarded  some  of  his  followers  by  a  grant  of  territory 
in  Virginia.1  The  recipients  soon  afterwards  sublet  the  land  to 
three  private  persons,  but  no  immediate  attempt  was  made  to  act 
on  the  patent,  nor  is  there  anything  to  show  that  the  Virginians 
were  even  aware  of  the  attack  upon  their  rights. 

The  territory  specified  was  all  that  bounded  by  the  Rapahan- 
nock  and  Potomac  rivers,  and  the  Chesapeake  Bay.  Such  a 
reckless  invasion  of  private  rights  might  perhaps  be  pardoned  in 
a  young  dethroned  prince,  driven  to  his  wits'  ends  for  resources 
and  wholly  ignorant,  we  may  well  believe,  of  the  nature  and  ex- 
tent of  his  grant.  The  restored  king,  however,  was  bound  by  his 
act  of  folly,  nor  is  there  anything  to  show  that  he  strove  to  free 
himself  from  the  dishonorable  obligation.  Two  mandates  are 
extant,  one  issued  immediately  after  the  Restoration,  the  other  a 
year  later,  both  commanding  the  Virginians  to  accept  the  grant 
and  further  the  purposes  thereof.2  The  second  of  these  mandates 
shows  clearly  by  its  tone  that  the  first  had  been  neglected,  and 
that  such  neglect  was  regarded  as  a  matter  of  displeasure.  The 
patentees  appear  at  one  time  to  have  taken  active  steps  to  en- 
force their  rights  by  sending  out  agents.  All  that  is  known  of 
this  attempt  is  the  fact  that  it  was  hindered  by  the  colonists,  and 
that  it  was  followed  up  by  a  letter  from  the  king,  written  at  the 
request  of  the  patentees,  enjoining  the  colonists  to  abstain  from 
such  conduct,  and  announcing  an  intention  of  prosecuting  the 
scheme.3  A  letter  from  Ludwell,  the  Secretary  of  the  Virginian 
government,  to  Arlington  throws  some  further  light  on  the  mat-. 
ter.4     Ludwell,  like  most  of  the  leading  Virginians  of  that  day, 

1  The  original  grant  does  not  seem  to  be  extant.  The  earliest  reference  to  it,  as  far  as  I 
know,  is  the  mandate  referred  to  below.  In  that  the  names  of  rivers  and  places  are  hope- 
lessly misspelled. 

2  Colonial  Papers,  1662,  Decembers;   1663,  August. 

3  The  petition  of  the  patentees  to  the  king  and  his  letter  are  both  among  the  Colonial  Pa- 
ters.    The  latter  is  dated  Jan.  26,  1670.     The  former  is  undated.  4  lb. 


GRANT  TO  ARLINGTON  AND  CULPEPPER.  239 

addresses  the  home  authorities  in  a  courtier-like  and  often  servile 
tone.  Nevertheless  he  seems  to  have  been  a  man  of  intelligence 
and  to  have  had  a  real  and  honest  anxiety  for  the  welfare  of  the 
colony.  He  dwells  upon  the  hinderance  to  industry  caused  by 
such  a  grant.  How,  he  asks,  can  it  be  expected  that  the  colo- 
nists will  employ  themselves  on  the  improvement  of  the  soil,  un- 
less they  know  whether  they  are  making  a  country  for  the  king 
or  for  some  other  proprietor  ?  By  this  means  and  by  insinuating 
that  the  agents  of  the  patentees  were  taking  an  independent  line 
and  disregarding  the  English  government,  Ludwell  strove  to 
prejudice  the  king  and  his  advisers  against  the  grant.  Whether 
this  took  effect,  or  whether  the  patentees  found  the  opposition  of 
the  colonists  too  much  for  them,  is  unknown,  but  the  attempt  was 
abandoned  and  the  grant  was  restored  to  the  crown. 

The  conduct  of  the  king  at  once  showed  that  it  was  no  respect 
for  the  rights  of  the  colonists  which  had  brought  about  this  sur- 
The  grant  render.  The  original  patentees  enjoyed  a  third  of  the 
t°rfandg"  territorv  OI"  Virginia.  No  sooner  was  their  grant  re- 
Cuipepper.  stored  to  the  crown  than  a  fresh  transfer  was  made, 
conveying  the  fee-simple  of  the  whole  of  the  colony  to  Lord 
Arlington  and  Lord  Culpepper.1  That  such  a  grant  should  have 
been  made  is  so  astonishing  that  nothing  but  the  very  deed  itself, 
yet  extant,  could  be  accepted  as  evidence  of  the  fact.  The  pat- 
entees were  empowered  to  make  grants  of  land,  reserving  a  quit- 
rent  ;  they  had  the  dangerous  right  of  nominating  sheriffs  and 
land-surveyors,  and  the  whole  Church  patronage  of  the  colony 
was  placed  in  their  hands.  Not  a  word  was  said  about  vested 
interests,  not  a  word  about  the  return  due  for  all  the  labor  be- 
stowed on  transforming  a  wilderness  into  a  fit  abode  for  civilized 
men.  Yet  if  security  of  tenure  is  necessary  to  the  prospects  of 
an  old  and  settled  country,  much  more  so  is  it  in  a  new  colony. 
The  motive  which  acts  upon  the  best  class  of  emigrants  is  not  the 
prospect  of  immediate  gain.  It  is  the  hope  that  by  years  of  toil 
and  hardship  they  may  secure  comfort  and  ease  for  their  old  age 
and  for  those  that  may  come  after  them.  Throughout  the  whole 
of  their  history  this  feeling  had  been  uppermost  with  the  Virgin- 
ians. It  was  the  dread  of  an  insecure  tenure  which  in  the  first 
instance  prompted  them  to  support  the  Company,  and  then,  with 
seeming  inconsistency,  to  oppose  its  renewal.  But  of  these  things 
the  king  and  his  counselors  recked  nothing.     Yet  in  fact  the  new 

1  The  original  grant  is  in  the  Colonial  Papers,  1672,  February. 


24o  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORA  TION. 

grant,  though  more  outrageous  in  principle  and  seemingly  more 
threatening,  was  probably  less  dangerous  than  the  former  one. 
In  the  first  place,  it  is  but  just  to  say  that  Arlington  and  Culpep- 
per, venal  and  rapacious  though  they  were,  were  yet  men  of  some 
statesmanlike  instincts,  not  mere  court  favorites,  like  the  first  pat- 
entees. Arlington,  too,  had  in  the  letters  of  his  colonial  corre- 
spondents ample  material  for  understanding  the  true  condition 
of  Virginia.  In  another  way,  too,  the  greater  encroachment  was 
the  less  dangerous  one.  The  first  grant  only  dealt  with  one-third 
of  the  soil,  and  thus  directly  concerned  only  a  third  of  the  inhab- 
itants. It  was  possible  that  the  majority  might  prefer  to  look  on 
quietly,  and  to  obtain  the  good  graces  of  the  patentees  and  the 
crown,  rather  than  stand  up  for  the  rights  of  their  fellow-colonists. 
The  grant  to  Arlington  and  Culpepper  took  in  the  whole  of  Vir- 
ginia, and  thus  threatened  all  alike.  Accordingly  the  colonists 
seem  to  have  resisted  at  the  very  outset,  and  that  with  partial 
success.  The  patentees  surrendered  all  their  newly-acquired 
rights  except  the  quit-rents  and  escheats.  In  lieu  of  the  remain- 
der they  took  a  duty  of  three-halfpence  per  pound  on  tobacco. 

This  compromise  averted  the  worst  danger,  that  of  a  total  sub- 
version of  established  titles  to  land,  but  it  failed  to  satisfy  the 
colonists.  They  deemed  it  well  to  guard  against  similar  encroach- 
ments and  to  put  their  rights  on  a  surer  basis.  To  effect  this  an 
agency  was  sent  to  England  consisting  of  Ludwell,  Moryson,  and 
Smith.  Of  LudwelPs  personal  character  I  have  already  spoken. 
Moryson  seems  to  have  been  a  man  of  the  same  stamp,  cautious, 
moderate,  and  ever  ready  to  push  his  own  interests,  yet  in  the 
main  loyal  to  his  employers,  and  having  a  clear  understanding  of 
the  condition  and  needs  of  the  colony.  Of  the  third  colleague, 
Smith,  we  know  nothing. 

At  first  the  agency  seemed  to  be  thoroughly  successful.  Its 
object,  apparently,  was  not  to  deprive  Arlington  and  Culpepper 
of  what  they  still  enjoyed,  but  to  fence  in  their  grant  with  such 
provisions  as  should  prevent  its  being  hereafter  dangerous  to  the 
liberties  of  the  colony.  Accordingly  they  petitioned  for  a  charter. 
Their  application  was  granted,  and  the  law  officers  of  the  crown 
were  instructed  to  draw  up  such  an  instrument.  The  rough  draft 
was  actually  executed  confirming  the  existing  constitution,  and 
adding  a  definite  provision  that  no  tax  should  be  laid  on  the  col- 
onists without  the  consent  of  the  Governor,  Council,  and  Bur- 
gesses.     Moreover,  the  Governor,  Council,  and  Commonalty  of 


GRIEVANCES  OE  THE  COLONISTS.  241 

Virginia  were  to  be  formed  into  a  corporation  for  the  one  pur- 
pose of  purchasing  the  territorial  rights  of  Culpepper  and  Arling- 
ton. Such  encroachments  were  for  the  future  guarded  against 
by  a  clause  declaring  that  the  crown  would  henceforth  make  no 
grants  of  land  without  the  approval  of  the  Governor  and  Coun- 
cil.1 All  the  needful  formalities  seem  to  have  been  completed, 
when  suddenly  the  whole  matter  was  brought  to  a  stop  by  the 
tidings  of  an  outbreak  of  popular  fury  in  the  colony. 

Prominent  among  the  causes  of  this  ill-timed  explosion  was 
the  very  existence  of  the  agency  itself.  To  provide  for  the  cost 
Popular  °f  it  a  poll-tax  of  fifty  pounds  of  tobacco  was  imposed  : 
grievances,  the  colonists,  like  tax-payers  in  general,  were  more 
ready  to  clamor  in  defense  of  their  rights  than  to  pay  the  needful 
price,  and  the  impost  was  viewed  as  a  grievance. 

This  discontent  was  increased  in  the  next  year  by  a  most  un- 
just and  ill-timed  revival  of  that  disqualifying  law  which  had 
been  passed  in  1655,  and  repealed  in  the  following  year,  and 
which  withheld  the  franchise  from  all  save  landholders  and  house- 
holders. 

Justice  apart,  it  would  be  difficult  to  imagine  anything  more 
ill-judged  than  this  curtailment  of  the  popular  right  of  self-gov- 
ernment at  the  very  moment  when  all  classes  needed  to  be 
united  against  a  common  enemy.  Besides,  in  the  existing  con- 
dition of  the  Assembly,  this  measure  was  almost  an  acknowledg- 
ment that  the  Burgesses  had  ceased  to  represent  popular  feeling, 
and  that  they  were  seeking  to  perpetuate  their  own  power  by 
changing  the  basis  of  representation. 

The  immediate  impulse  towards  civil  commotion  was  given  by 
an  external  enemy.  For  nearly  thirty  years  the  red  men  and  the 
Relations  colonists  had  been  at  peace.  So  utterly  were  the  dan- 
indians6  gers  of  Indian  warfare  forgotten,  that  in  1650  a  Vir- 
ginian writer,  referring  to  the  massacre,  tells  us  that  "  one  man 
that  was  but  master  of  a  heart  and  a  pitchfork,  hath  been  known 
to  stave  off  and  affright  ten  of  them  ;  nor  were  any  that  had  the 
generosity  to  oppose,  or  the  discretion  to  keep  good  their  houses, 
massacred  by  them;  "2  and  in  1661  Berkeley  reported  that  "  the 
Indians,  our  neighbours,  are  absolutely  subjected  so  that  there  is 
no  fear  of  them." 3  The  legislation  of  the  Virginian  Assembly  on 
behalf  of  the  savages  during  this  period  is  marked  with  honorable 

1  The  draught  of  this  charter  is  given  in  the  Colonial  Papers,  1675,  November  19. 
8  Virginia  Richly  and  Truly  Valued,  p.  58.  8  Hening,  vol.  ii.  p.  513. 

l6 


\ 


242  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RES  TOR  A  TION. 

and  unhappily  exceptional  features.  More  than  one  law  was 
passed  prohibiting  their  enslavement,  either  by  kidnapping  adults 
or  buying  children.1  A  law  passed  in  1654  specially  protected 
their  lives  when  they  came  on  to  the  lands  of  the  settlers.2  The 
Assembly  of  1655  went  further,  and  adopting  a  policy  which  had 
been  unknown  since  the  days  of  the  Company,  took  steps  towards 
civilizing  and  educating  the  savages.  It  proposed  to  give  their 
children  schooling,  to  encourage  the  Indians  in  agriculture  by 
giving  them  cows  as  rewards  for  destroying  wolves,  and  to  in- 
capacitate them  from  alienating  their  lands.3  In  1657  they  were 
protected  by  enactment  from  the  intrusion  of  squatters.4  In  the 
next  year  the  same  policy  was  carried  to  an  unwise  length ;  the 
Indians  were  allowed  to  carry  arms,  and  all  restrictions  on  their 
trade  with  the  settlers  were  removed.5  The  legislature  of  1659 
enacted  that  no  debts  should  be  recoverable  from  Indians,  and 
that  no  merchants  should  take  Indian  children  to  England  with- 
out the  consent  of  their  parents.6  In  the  following  year  a  further 
step  was  taken,  and  a  portion  of  the  peninsula  of  Accomac  was 
settled  inalienably  on  the  Indians.7  This  territory  was  probably 
selected  because  the  isolated  position  made  it  impossible  for  the 
Indians  there  to  act  in  concert  with  their  brethren  on  the  main- 
land. In  1662  a  consolidated  Act  was  passed  containing  a  digest 
of  all  the  laws  then  in  force  with  respect  to  the  Indians.8  Alien- 
ation of  Indian  lands  was  forbidden ;  those  who  had  encroached 
on  their  territory  were  to  be  ejected,  and  their  houses  pulled 
down.  Badges  were  granted  as  passports  to  the  friendly  Indians 
who  should  have  occasion  to  come  among  the  settlers.  The  per- 
sonal rights  of  the  savages  were  carefully  guarded.  No  chief  was 
to  be  imprisoned,  and  no  Indian  whatever  was  to  be  held  as  a 
slave  for  a  longer  period  than  was  lawful  in  the  case  of  an  Eng- 
lishman. In  1665  we  find  the  one  exception  to  the  uniformly 
benevolent  and  merciful  tenor  of  Virginian  legislation.  It  was 
enacted  that  in  case  of  a  white  man  being  murdered  by  the  In- 
dians, the  nearest  town  should  be  held  responsible.9  In  the  fol- 
lowing year,  however,  this  was  repealed.  Nor  were  the  enact- 
ments on  behalf  of  the  Indians  allowed  to  be  a  dead  letter.  In 
this  same  session  of  1666  we  find  the  above  laws  put  in  force 
against  four  leading  settlers.     Colonel  Yorke  is  fined  ten  thous- 

1  Hening,  vol.  i.  pp.  455,  482,  515.  2  Jb.,  vol.  i.  p.  410. 

•  lb.,  vol.  i.  p.  393.  *  lb.,  vol.  i.  p.  467.  6  ib,t  vol.  i.  pp.  518,  525. 

6  lb.,  vol.  i.  p.  341.  7  lb.,  vol.  ii.  p.  13. 

8  Hening,  vol.  ii.  p.  138.  9  lb.,  p.  219. 


OUTBREAK  OF  WAR  WITH  THE  INDIANS.  243 

and  pounds  of  tobacco  for  allowing  the  murderer  of  an  Indian 
to  escape.  Captain  Brent  and  Captain  Hawk,  who  had  illegally- 
imprisoned  an  Indian,  are  fined  fifteen  thousand  pounds  of  tobac- 
co, and  are  disqualified  for  all  civil  or  military  offices.  Finally, 
Colonel  Moore  Fauntleroy  is  disqualified  from  holding  any  office 
for  extorting  the  territory  of  Roanoke  from  the  Indians. 

In  1676  this  harmony  came  to  an  end.  As  was  often  the 
case,  hostilities  began  with  a  petty  act  of  dishonesty,  though  it 
Outbreak  is  not  easy  to  say  which  side  was  guilty  of  it.  The 
ties.°sU  '  Doegs,  a  tribe  on  the  Potomac,  charged  a  planter 
named  Mathews  with  cheating  them,  and  in  retaliation  stole  his 
swine.  The  thieves  were  pursued  and  some  of  them  killed. 
The  Doegs  then  invaded  the  English  plantation  and  killed  at 
least  four  of  the  settlers.  Thereupon  two  English  officers,  one  of 
them  that  Captain  Brent  who  had  already  been  involved  in  a 
quarrel  with  the  Indians,  raised  a  small  troop  and  pursued  the 

1  Our  materials  for  an  account  of  Bacon's  rebellion  are  very  ample  and  our  only  difficulty 
lies  in  comparing  them  and  estimating  their  relative  values. 
The  main  authorities  are  : — 

I.  The  Report  of  the  Commissioners  sent  out  from  England.  This,  together  with  many 
letters,  proclamations,  etc.,  bearing  on  the  matter,  is  published  in  the  Colonial  Entry  Book, 
No.  lxxxi.  The  account  is  full  and  carefully  arranged,  and  is,  on  the  whole,  the  best  narra- 
tive of  the  rebellion.  A  summary  of  it  is  published  in  an  appendix  to  Burk's  History  of  Vir. 
gi7iia. 

II.  We  have  besides  three  contemporary  accounts,  all  published  in  Force,  vol.  i. 

1.  The  Beginning,  Progress,  and  Conclusion  of  Bacon's  rebellion  from  a  MS.  by  T.  M., 
sent  to  Sir  Robert  Harley.  The  author,  T.  M.,  was  a  member  of  the  Assembly  of  1676,  sit- 
ting for  Stafford  County.  The  value  of  his  account  is  that  he  gives  a  report  of  the  proceedings 
at  Jamestown  before  Bacon  actually  took  up  arms.  The  writer  himself  was  concerned  in 
these,  and  our  faith  in  him  is  increased  by  the  fact  that  he  plays  a  very  unheroic  part  in  his 
own  story.  His  narrative  is  confined  to  what  he  himself  saw,  and  as  he  left  Jamestown  be- 
fore Bacon  finally  took  up  arms,  this  account  throws  no  light  on  the  later  stages  of  the  re- 
bellion. 

2.  An  Account  of  our  late  Troubles  in  Virginia,  written  in  1676  by  Mrs.  Anne  Cotton  to  a 
friend  in  Northamptonshire.  Appended  is  a  short  letter  from  Mrs.  Cotton's  husband.  This 
account  remained  in  manuscript  till  1804,  when  it  was  published  in  a  Richmond  newspaper. 
Of  the  three  accounts  it  is  the  best  written.     It  seems  free  from  party  feeling. 

■  3.  A  Narrative  of  the  Indian  Civil  Wars  in  Virginia,  found  among  the  papers  of  a  Virginian 
family  by  one  Captain  Burwell. 

This  is  a  very  detailed  report,  written  in  a  most  cumbrous  and  pretentious  style  with  elabo- 
rate attempts  at  wit,  always  dull  and  occasionally  indecent.  A  good  many  of  the  details  seem 
to  have  been  obtained  from  Bacon's  own  party,  and,  as  far.  as  we  can  judge,  the  writer's 
sympathies  are  with  the  insurgents.  At  the  same  time  it  is  just  to  say  that  he  does  not  gloss 
over  their  excesses.     This,  as  well  as  T.  M.'s  Account,  were  first  published  by  Force.    N 

There  are  similarities  of  expression  and  thought  about  Mrs.  Cotton's  Account  and  the  Bur- 
well  MS.,  which  make  it  possible  that  they  may  be  connected.  Mrs.  Cotton  may  have  epito- 
mized the  more  elaborate  account,  or  her  report  may  have  been  afterwards  amplified  into  the 
more  pretentious  narrative. 

Besides  these  authorities  we  have  occasional  letters.  One  from  Ludwell,  written  in  the 
form  of  a  diary  during  the  time  of  Bacon's  first  arrival  at  Jamestown,  is  specially  valuable. 
On  the  whole  there  is  remarkable  unanimity  between  our  various  informants. 


244  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

enemy  into  Maryland.  Four  miles  beyond  the  Potomac  the 
river  branched.  The  pursuers  chose  the  wrong  path  and  found 
themselves  almost  immediately  opposite  an  Indian  village.  The 
chief  attempted  to  flee,  but  was  shot  down  by  Brent.  A  skirmish 
then  ensued,  and  it  was  not  till  fourteen  of  the  Indians  had  fallen 
that  the  English  discovered  that  they  were  on  the  wrong  track, 
and  that  the  village  belonged  to  the  Susquehannocks,  then*  a 
friendly  tribe.  A  desultory  war  on  the  frontiers,  both  of  Mary- 
land and  Virginia,  now  followed.  Each  colony  raised  a  thousand 
men,  and  the  joint  force  laid  siege  to  the  principal  Indian  fort  at 
the  head  of  the  Potomac.  This  fort  was  strongly  intrenched,  and 
guarded  in  front  by  a  natural  or  artificial  ditch,  by  earthworks 
and  by  an  external  palisade.  Moreover,  as  we  have  seen,  the 
over-trustful  policy  of  the  settlers  had  supplied  the  defending 
force  w*th  arms  and  ammunition.  For  six  weeks  the  English 
laid  siege  to  the  fort,  but  to  no  purpose.  The  Indians,  however, 
were  hard  pressed  enough  to  make  overtures  for  peace.  Six  of 
their  chiefs  came  out,  as  it  is  said,  to  treat  with  the  besiegers, 
and  were  killed  by  them.  Our  authorities  tell  of  the  affair  with- 
out comment  or  explanation,  but  it  is  clear  that  it  was  regarded 
by  some  of  the  settlers  themselves  as  a  stain  on  their  honor. 
"They  should  have  gone  away  in  safety  had  they  killed  my  own 
father,"  was  Berkeley's  indignant  comment  when  he  heard  of  it! 
At  length  the  Indians  by  one  of  their  stratagems  succeeded  in 
getting  out  of  the  fort  without  the  knowledge  of  the  besiegers. 
They  invaded  the  plantations,  and  with  'some  rude  idea  of  retali- 
atory justice,  slew  sixty  of  the  settlers,  ten  for  every  one  of  their 
murdered  chiefs. 

They  then  sent  an  embassy  to  the  Governor  to  treat  with  him 
for  peace.  Their  representatives  declared  that  the  recent  slaught- 
ers were  but  just  retaliation ;  they  demanded  satisfaction  for  the 
injuries  done  in  the  war,  and  promised,  if  the  Virginians  would 
abandon  the  alliance  with  Maryland,  to  cease  from  hostilities. 
However  the  quarrel  might  have  begun,  to  accept  such  terms 
would  have  been  a  fatal  admission  of  weakness,  and  the  English 
peremptorily  refused  to  entertain  the  proposals.  Yet  they  seem 
to  have  taken  no  steps  to  guard  against  the  inroad  which  was  cer- 
tain to  follow.  The  savages  invaded  the  country  and  killed  three 
hundred  of  the  settlers,  many  with  the  horrors  customary  in  an 
Indian  execution.  The  only  measure  of  defense  adopted  by 
.Berkeley  was  to  build  some  small  forts  on  the  frontier,  a  precau- 


NATHANIEL  BACON  245 

tion  of  little  use  against  an  enemy  to  whom  every  yard  of  the 
forest  was  an  open  pathway.  So  futile,  indeed,  did  the  means  of 
defense  seem,  that  the  Virginians  set  it  down  as  a  piece  of  job- 
bery on  the  part  of  the  Governor.  It  would  be  grossly  unfair  to 
condemn  Berkeley  on  mere  suspicion  of  having  sought  to  make 
a  corrupt  profit  out  of  the  danger  of  the  colony,  but  the  mere 
fact  that  such  a  belief  existed  speaks  ill  for  his  public  character. 
Dissatisfaction  pervaded  the  whole  colony,  and  all  the  inhabi- 
tants of  the  threatened  districts  clamored  for  active  measures 
against  the  Indians. 

In  this  crisis  a  leader  was  found  to  give  definite  form  and  pur- 
pose to  the  popular  discontent.     Nathaniel  Bacon  seems  to  have 
Nathaniel    ^een  one  °^  tnose  restless,  venturesome,  unsuccessful 
Bacon.        men  w^  whom  the  Virginian  colony  had  been  so  large- 
ly recruited  in  early  days  and  of  whom  there  is  never  a  lack  in 
any  new  country.     He  had  lost  his  estate  in  England,  and  had 
now  bettered  his  fortunes  by  a  marriage  with  a  rich  widow.     Her 
position  of  landlady  of  the  chief,  probably  the  only,  tavern  in 
Jamestown,  gave  Bacon  a  wide  circle  of  acquaintance,  with  whom 
he  seems  to  have  enjoyed  a  high  reputation  for  courage  and  abili- 
ty.    How  far  this  was  deserved  it  is  hard  to  say.     We  know  too 
little  of  the  details  of  Bacon's  campaign  against  the  Indians  to 
judge  of  his  capacity  as  a  soldier.     In  an  unsettled  and  excited 
state  of  public  feeling,  popular  judgment  is  little  to  be  relied  on, 
and  though  Bacon's  name  was  undoubtedly  associated  with  use- 
ful and  important  measures,  we  cannot  judge  how  far  these  were 
due  to  him,  how  far  to  those  with  whom  circumstances  had  for 
a  time  allied  him.     Be  his  character  what  it  might,  it  seems  clear 
that  those  who  asked  for  vigorous  measures  against  the  Indians 
fastened  on  Bacon  as  a  fit  *leader  and  supported  him  in  his  de- 
mand for  a  commission.     This  Berkeley  refused.     Bacon  there- 
upon vowed  that  if  another  Englishman  were  killed  he  would 
take  up  arms,  even  without  authority.    As  chance  would  have  it, 
the  very  next  victim   to   the  fury  of  the  Indians  was  Bacon's 
favorite  servant,  the  overseer  of  his  plantation.    Upon  this  Bacon 
gathered  together  a  small  force  of  about  a  hundred  planters,  .and 
invaded  the  Indian  country.     As  might  have  been  expected  with 
a  force  thus  hastily  raised,  they  soon  ran   short  of  provisions. 
One  by  one  Bacon's  followers  dropped  away  till  at  length  he  was 
left  with  only  fifty-seven  men.     An  attempt  to  get  supplies  from 
the  friendly  Indians  failed,  owing,  it  was  said,  to  the  intrigues  of 


246  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

Berkeley,  who  was  suspected  of  having  sent  a  private  messenger 
to  the  savages.  Bacon,  resenting  the  refusal,  attacked  the  village, 
which  was  fortified,  stormed  and  burned  it,  killing,  according  to  his 
own  account,  a  hundred  and  fifty  of  the  inhabitants,  and  seizing 
four  thousand  pounds  of  powder.1 

In  the  mean  time  Berkeley  had  proclaimed  Bacon  a  rebel  and 
had  made  an  ineffectual  attempt  to  march  out  in  pursuit  of  him. 
a  fresh  This,  however,  he  had  abandoned,  apparently  for  lack 
Assembly.  0f  support.  His  next  step  was  a  concession  to  popular 
feeling.  The  "  Long  Assembly  "  was  dissolved  and  writs  issued 
for  a  new  one.  Yet  in  the  very  proclamation  by  which  the  dis- 
solution was  declared,  Berkeley  treated  the  demand  for  fresh  rep- 
resentatives as  a  strange  and  unmeaning  fancy.  Any  reasonable 
man,  he  implied,  would  prefer  an  experienced  Assembly  to  a  new 
and  untried  one.  Still,  if  the  colonists  were  so  perverse  as  to  de- 
sire a  change,  they  might  have  their  own  way. 

The  most  noteworthy  feature  of  the  election  was  the  return  of. 
Bacon  for  the  county  in  which  he  lived.  This  election  was  clear- 
Bacon  ty  illegal-  Bacon  had  been  proclaimed  by  the  Gov- 
eiedted.  ernor  a  rebel.  If  Berkeley's  proclamation  was  invalid, 
Bacon  still  remained  a  Councilor  and  was  therefore  ineligible. 
This  point,  however,  does  not  seem  to  have  been  raised,  and 
Bacon  came  to  Jamestown  to  take  his  seat  apparently  in  a  peace- 
ful manner.  Berkeley,  however,  sent  out  a  force  to  meet  him ; 
his  sloop  was  destroyed  and  he  himself  brought  in  a  prisoner. 

It  is  not  easy  to  understand  clearly  the  nature  of  the  events 
which  followed.  The  actual  facts  are  plainly  enough  recorded. 
Proceedings  The  difficulty  is  to  understand  the  motives  of  the  vari- 
Assembiy.  ous  actors  and  the  causes  which  explain  their  rapid  and 
seemingly  meaningless  changes  of  policy.  Berkeley's  first  step 
was  to  pardon  Bacon  and  restore  him  to  his  seat  in  the  Council, 
only  requiring  that  he  should  make  a  public  apology  for  his  mis- 
conduct. Whether  this  was  a  genuine  reconciliation  on  Berke- 
ley's part,  whether  he  found  that  public  opinion  was  too  strong 
for  him,  or  whether  his  object  was  merely  to  lull  Bacon  into  se- 
curity till  he  could  concert  measures  against  him,  seems  doubtful. 
It  is  at  least  clear  that  soon  after  Bacon  himself  took  the  least 
favorable  of  these  views.     In  any  case  the  turn  which  events 


1  The  Burwell  MS.,  p.  n.  This  affair  is  also  told  of  in  a  letter  among  the  Colonial  Papers 
from  one  of  Bacon's  followers.  He  relates  the  destruction  of  the  Indians,  women  and  chil- 
dren included,  in  a  tone  of  most  cold-blooded  brutality. 


MEASURES  OF  REFORM. 


247 


now  took  showed  how  completely  popular  opinion  was  against 
Berkeley.  Bacon  proceeded  against  him  in  the  civil  court  to  re- 
cover the  value  of  his  sloop,  and  was  awarded  seventy  pounds 
damages. 

The  Acts  which  were  then  passed  are  the  best  evidence  of  the 
evils  against  which  Bacon  took  up  arms.  One  Act  declared  that 
abuses  had  crept  into  government  offices,  and  ordered 
Re  orms.  ^at;  sheriffs  and  under-sheriffs  should  only  serve  for 
one  year.  No  public  functionary  was  to  hold  more  than  one 
office  at  a  time  or  to  exact  more  than  his  legal  dues.  The  secre- 
tary and  his  clerk  had  been  in  the  habit  of  levying  a  duty  of 
eighty  hogsheads  of  tobacco  on  every  parcel  of  land  granted ; 
for  the  future  they  were  to  levy  this  duty  only  on  each  patent,  which 
might  and  often  did  include  several  parcels.  The  Act  restricting 
the  franchise  was  repealed.  The  right  of  voting  was  restored  to 
every  freeman,  and  special  precautions  were  taken  to  check  the 
practice  of  making  false  returns.  Finally,  the  imposition  of  cer- 
tain taxes  which  had  hitherto  been  under  the  control  of  the  county 
magistrates  was  transferred  to  the  Assembly,  and  the  broad  prin- 
ciple of  the  connection  between  representation  and  taxation  was 
thus  definitely  laid  down. 

By  some  historians  these  measures  have  been  assigned  to 
Bacon's  personal  agency,  and  he  has  thus  obtained  the  repu- 
tation of  a  patriotic  reformer.  There  is,  however,  nothing  in 
what  we  know  of  Bacon's  character  or  actions  to  make  us  think 
that  he  possessed  any  statesmanlike  ability.  It  is  more  probable 
that  he  was  temporarily  associated  with  wiser  men  than  himself, 
who  took  the  opportunity  of  Berkeley's  unpopularity  and  of  the 
enthusiasm  which  Bacon's  cause  had  awakened  to  carry  out  their 
own  policy.  Yet  the  nature  of  these  measures,  and  the  manner 
in  which  they  were  carried,  make  strongly  against  the  view  that 
Bacon  was  merely  an  ambitious  agitator.  If  he  did  not  originate, 
he  at  least  supported  wise  and  patriotic  measures,  nor  were  they  car- 
ried either  by  force  or  intimidation.  It  is  clear,  too,  that  his  sup- 
porters were  not  drawn  solely  from  the  border  plantations  which 
were  specially  exposed  to  the  Indians,  nor  wTere  the  framers  of 
these  wise  and  temperate  reforms  the  mere  scum  and  rabble  which 
their  enemies  would  represent  them.  It  should  be  noticed,  too, 
that  this  Assembly  was  elected  under  the  disfranchising  law  of 

1  These  acts  are  in  Hening,  vol.  ii.  p.  341. 


248 


VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 


1670,  and  consequently  did  not  represent  the  lowest  class  of  the 
community. 

Meanwhile  the  immediate  danger  of  the  colony  was  not  for- 
gotton.  An  act  was  passed  "  for  carrying  on  a  war  against  the 
Theinsur-  barbarous  Indians."  One  thousand  men  were  to  be 
region.  raised,  of  whom  one-eighth  were  to  be  horse.  Bacon 
was  nominated  to  the  command,  and  a  committee  of  the  Assem- 
bly was  appointed  to  arrange  for  provisions  and  the  like.  Sud- 
denly in  the  midst  of  these  harmonious  proceedings  Bacon  took 
fright.  Of  the  grounds  of  his  suspicions  we  know  nothing,  nor 
is  it  easy  to  see  how  one  of  the  leaders,  ostensibly  indeed  the 
chief  leader,  of  a  party  which  was  carrying  all  before  it  need  have 
feared  his  personal  safety.  Believing,  however,  that  Berkeley 
had  designs  against  him,  Bacon  obtained  leave  to  visit  his  own 
plantation,  on  the  pretext  of  his  wife's  sickness.  Once  safely  in 
his  own  country,  Bacon  took  active  measures  against .  the  Gov- 
ernor. Dread  of  the  Indians  had  doubtless  kept  the  settlers  in 
a  state  of  readiness,  and  the  every-day  life  of  a  Virginian  planter 
made  little  military  preparation  needful.  Consequently  within 
four  days  Bacon  was  in  full  march  on  Jamestown  at  the  head  of 
four  hundred  men.  Berkeley  at  once  called  out  the  militia,  but 
his  forces  did  not  show  the  same  alacrity  as  the  rebels,  and  when 
Bacon's  army  appeared  before  Jamestown,  the  place  was  defense- 
less and  he  marched  in  unmolested. 

Hitherto  Bacon's  conduct  seems  to  have  been  that  of  a  capa- 
ble, energetic  man.  Now  if  we  may  believe  the  account  of  a 
Bacon's  not  unfriendly  witness,  he  behaved  like  a  madman, 
success.  gesticulating  frantically  in  the  streets  and  throwing  out 
insane  threats  against  the  Governor  and  Council.  Berkeley 
seems  to  have  fallen  into  the  same  dramatic  humor,  and  present- 
ing himself  to  the  rebels,  bared  his  breast  and  bade  them  fire.1 
Bacon  then,  desirous,  it  would  seem,  to  bring  the  melodrama  to 
a  happy  end,  assured  the  Governor  that  they  would  do  him  no 
injury,  and  that  he  only  wanted  a  commission  against  the  Indians. 
The  appeal  was  completely  successful.  The  authority  that  Bacon 
required  was  granted;  he  was  constituted  General  of  the  forces 
to  be  raised  against  the  Indians,  and  supplied  with  blank  com- 
missions to  be  filled  in  at  his  own  discretion.  In  addition  to 
this,  the  Assembly  passed  an   Act  of  Indemnity,  pardoning  all 

1  T.  M.,  who  seems  a  sober  writer  enough,  and  who  was  evidently  on  good  terms  with 
Bacon,  describes  these  proceedings. 


BACON  HEADS  THE  INSURGENTS.  249 

offenses  done  between  the  1st  of  March  and  the  24th  of  June, 
those  only  excepted  who  had  traded  with  the  Indians,  and  a 
report  approving  of  Bacon's  conduct  was  drawn  up  and  signed 
by  the  Governor. 

Armed  with  these  powers  and  having  apparently  disposed  of 
all  opposition,  Bacon  marched  against  the  Indians.  The  Gov- 
Berkeiey;  ernor's  next  step  fully  justified  Bacon's  previous  suspi- 
Accomac.  cions  of  his  good  faith.  Berkeley  left  Jamestown  and 
went  into  Gloucester,  the  richest,  most  populous,  and,  as  it  was 
thought,  most  loyal  county.  There,  in  violation  of  his  promise, 
he  proclaimed  Bacon  a  rebel,  and  called  out  the  militia  of  the 
county  to  support  him  against  the  insurgents.  The  militia  as- 
sembled to  the  number  of  twelve  hundred,  but  with  no  intention 
of  obeying  Berkeley.  After  a  general  profession  of  loyalty,  they 
declared  that  they  would  not  act  against  Bacon,  who  was  labor- 
ing for  the  salvation  of  the  colony,  and  deprecated  anything 
which  could  lead  to  civil  war  at  a  time  when  all  their  resources 
were  needed  against  the  common  enemy.  Berkeley,  finding  the 
Gloucester  men  in  no  mood  to  support  him,  then  took  ship  and 
crossed  over  to  Accomac,  carrying  with  him  all  the  arms  and 
ammunition  out  of  Fort  York,  and  so  leaving  an  important  post 
defenseless. 

Bacon,  perceiving  that  all  possibility  of  a  peaceful  settlement 
was  now  at  an  end,  took  more  decisive  measures.  He  issued  a 
Bacon  or-  manifesto  setting  forth  the  shortcomings  of  Berkeley 
gamzes  is  an^  t^e  grievances  of  the  colonists.  Whether  or  not 
this  document  represents  Bacon's  real  views,  we  may  at  least  as- 
sume that  it  embodied  what  he  thought  would  be  the  most  pop- 
ular arguments,  and  that  so  it  is  a  fair  guide  to  public  feeling. 
Besides  the  main  charge  of  neglecting  the  safety  of  the  colony, 
he  reproaches  the  government  with  its  unfair  preference  for  the 
Indians,  and  with  indifference  to  the  general  well-being  of  the  col- 
ony and  to  the  progress  of  education  and  the  useful  arts.  He 
dwells,  too,  on  the  fact  that  some  who  have  come  into  the  colony 
poor  have  become  rich,  evidently  with  the  implication  that  their  pri- 
vate profit  had  been  the  public  loss.  The  whole  document  breathes 
a  feverish  spirit  of  discontent.  It  is  clear  that  the  period  was  one- 
of  those  in  which  men  are  dissatisfied  with  the  social  and  polit- 
ical arrangements  around  them,  and  having  a  vague  feeling  that 
the  times  are  out  of  joint,  find  in  the  misconduct  of  government 
an  easy  explanation  of  more  deeply-rooted  evils.     In  addition  to 


250  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

this  remonstrance,  Bacon  issued  a  summons  to  a  convention  at 
Williamsburg,  some  ten  miles  north  of  Jamestown.  The  sum- 
mons was  obeyed  by  most  of  the  planters  in  that  neighborhood. 
When  the  convention  had  met  Bacon  addressed  them,  represent- 
ing the  necessity  of  the  war  against  the  Indians  and  the  impossi- 
bility of  carrying  it  on  vigorously,  unless  he  was  secured  against 
molestation  by  the  Governor.  For  this  purpose  a  test  was  drawn 
up  to  be  taken  by  all  the  inhabitants,  binding  them  in  no  way  to 
assist  Berkeley  against  Bacon  and  his  army.  This  seems  to  have 
been  readily  accepted.  Bacon,  however,  was  not  yet  satisfied, 
and  demanded  further  pledges.  He  required  that  all  his  follow- 
ers should  promise,  firstly,  to  support  him  actively  against  Berke- 
ley, and  secondly,  to  continue  that  support  against  any  troops 
that  might  be  sent  out  from  England,  until  such  time  as  the  whole 
case  might  be  laid  before  the  king.  In  spite  of  Bacon's  repre- 
sentations that  these  pledges  were  absolutely  necessary  to  his 
safety,  the  majority  of  the  convention  were  unwilling  to  take  up 
the  position  of  armed  rebels.  But  when  the  news  came  that 
Berkeley  had  stripped  York  Point,  and  to  further  his  own  cause 
against  Bacon,  had  left  the  country  defenseless,  many  wavered. 
Their  remaining  scruples  were  surmounted  by  Bacon,  who  allowed 
the  oath  to  be  taken  with  the  somewhat  contradictory  reservation 
that  it  should  not  so  bind  the  takers  as  to  interfere  with  their  oath 
of  allegiance.  This  condition,  however,  seems  to  have  been  after- 
wards withdrawn.  Having  thus  secured  the  support  of  his  fol- 
lowers, Bacon  issued  a  summons  for  an  Assembly,  signed  by  four 
of  the  Council.  The  popularity  of  his  cause  now  spread  to 
Jamestown,  and  without,  as  far  as  we  can  discover,  any  resistance, 
the  capital  was  occupied  by  an  armed  force  of  seven  or  eight 
hundred  rebels. 

We  can  hardly  doubt  that  it  was  about  this  stage  of  his  career 
that  Bacon  first  broached  such  schemes  of  independence  as  are 
Projett  of  attributed  to  him  in  a  contemporary  document.1  There 
enctpen  "  is  a  letter  by  a  leading  colonist,  Good,  apparently  a 
man  of  moderate  views  and  a  personal  friend  of  Bacon.  He 
gives  in  dialogue  form  a  discussion  between  Bacon  and  himself 
which  is  not  a  little  interesting  read  by  the  light  of  events  a  cent- 
ury later. 

The  dialogue  begins  with  an  abrupt  question  from  Bacon. 
Could  twenty  thousand  red-coats  subdue  Virginia  ?     Good  tells 

1  Colonial  E?itry  Book,  No.  Ixxxi. 


BERKELE  Y'S  FOLIC Y  251 

him  that  a  quarter  of  the  number  could  if  they  had  command  of 
the  sea  and  were  able  to  land  at  different  points,  burning  and  de- 
stroying. Bacon  in  reply  dwells  on  the  fitness  of  the  colonists 
for  a  backwoods  war  of  surprises  and  ambushes,  and  the  suffer- 
ings which  the  invaders  would  undergo  from  the  novelty  of  the 
climate.  The  country,  he  points  out,  can  almost  support  itself, 
and  the  few  needful  imports  might  be  got  from  France  and  the 
Netherlands.  With  foresight  which  may  have  been  in  some 
measure  the  fruit  of  chance,  Bacon  suggests  the  possibility  of  a 
confederation  between  Virginia,  Maryland,  and  Carolina,  build- 
ing his  hopes  mainly  on  the  uncivilized  and  rebellious  temper  of 
the  last-named  colony.  This  scheme,  Good  thinks,  had  sunk 
deep  into  the  mind  of  the  rebel  leader,  as  was  shown  by  his  choice 
of  "  Carolina  "  as  the  watchword  for  his  troops. 

In  the  mean  time  Berkeley  was  making  counter-preparations. 
The  support  which  he  had  vainly  sought  for  in  Gloucester,  he 
now  obtained  in  Accomac  by  promising  that  the  rebels'  estates 
should  be  confiscated  and  given  to  those  who  remained  loyal, 
and  that  all  who  supported  him  should  be  discharged,  themselves 
and  their  heirs,  from  all  taxes,  except  church  dues,  for  twenty-one 
years,  and  if  servants  to  rebels,  should  be  set  free.  By  these 
promises  and  by  the  pay  of  a  shilling  a  day,  the  Governor  suc- 
ceeded in  enlisting  about  a  thousand  men.  In  addition  to  these 
he  was  possessed  of  one  ship  and  two  sloops.  Thus  the  country 
was  in  an  open  and  declared  state  of  civil  war,  with  two  little 
armies  confronting  one  another,  one  on  the  mainland,  the  other 
at  Accomac. 

The  first  blow  seems  to  have  been  struck  by  the  Governor, 
who  used  his  fleet  to  harry  the  mainland.  Thereupon  Bacon 
Berkeley's  dispatched  two  vessels  to  blockade  the  Governor  and 
successes.  c]ieck  his  depredations.  They  were  also,  if  possible, 
to  draw  off  the  inhabitants  of  Accomac  from  their 'allegiance. 
If  our  accounts  of  what  followed  be  true,  Berkeley  was  less 
scrupulous  in  his  dealings  with  rebels  than  with  Indians.  One  of 
the  two  commanders  of  Bacon's  party,  Carver,  was  lured  on 
shore  by  promises  of  safety.  After  an  ineffectual  attempt  to  se- 
duce him  from  his  leader,  he  set  out  for  his  ship.  A  boat  was 
sent  out  from  the  mainland  which  out-rowed  Carver's  sloop  and 
reached  the  vessel  first.  This  vessel  had  been  pressed  by  Bacon 
into  his  service,  crew  and  all,  and  her  former  commander,  Law- 
rence, was  now  among  the  insurgent  leaders.     The  crew  returned 


252  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

to  their  old  allegiance,  and  by  their  aid  the  ship  was  boarded  and 
the  rebels  taken  prisoners.  Emboldened  by  this  success,  Berkeley 
and  his  force  crossed  over  to  the  mainland  and  issued  a  procla- 
mation offering  pardon  to  all  who  would  return  to  their  allegiance, 
Bacon  and  his  two  chief  supporters,  Drummond  and  Lawrence, 
alone  excepted.  This,  however,  seems  to  have  had  but  little 
effect,  since  the  mass  of  the  rebels  remained  faithful  to  their  lead- 
ers and  in  a  body  deserted  Jamestown. 

Bacon  himself,  during  all  this  time,  had  been  busy  with  his 
company  against  the  Indians.  Having  brought  that  matter  to  a 
Burning  of  successful  end,  he  disbanded  most  of  his  troops  before 
Jamestown.  he  heard  of  the  Governor's  landing.  When  the  news 
reached  him,  he  marched  with  about  a  hundred  and  fifty  men 
who  yet  remained  with  him,  and  laid  siege  to  the  town.  The 
place  was  surrounded  by  water,  and  could  thus  be  easily  de- 
fended by  any  party  that  had  command  of  the  river.  Moreover, 
Bacon's  force  was  so  weak  as  to  be  not  merely  unequal  to  the 
task  of  a  successful  attack,  but  itself  in  danger  from  a  sally. 
Bacon  now,  exasperated,  it  may  be  by  the  treachery  of  the  Gov- 
ernor towards  Carver,  had  recourse  to  an  atrocious  expedient. 
He  captured  Lady  Berkeley,  who  was  still  in  the  country,  and 
other  of  the  wives  and  kinsfolk  of  his  chief  enemies,  and  placed 
them  under  range  of  the  defender's  guns.1  By  this  means  the 
most  vulnerable  part  of  Bacon's  line  was  protected  against  the 
enemy's  fire.  A  sally  made  by  the  besieged  failed  mainly  through 
a  violent  thunderstorm.  Berkeley  after  this,  disheartened  it 
would  seem  by  the  lukewarm  temper  of  his  supporters,  took  ship 
and  returned  to  Accomac,  leaving  Jamestown  at  the  mercy  of  the 
rebels.  Bacon  then,  feeling  that  his  own  force  was  too  weak  to 
hold  the  place,  and  fearing  that  Berkeley  would  return  to  occupy 
it  with  additional  troops,  set  fire  to  the  town. 

Bacon  now  proceeded  to  follow  up  his  success  by  marching 
into  Gloucester  county,  which,  since  Berkeley's  ineffectual  attempt 
Death  of  to  enlist  it  on  his  side,  had  taken  no  part  in  the  war. 
Bacon.  j±s  might  have  been  expected  from  their  previous  con- 
duct, the  settlers  readily  took  the  oath  of  fidelity  to  the  rebel 
leader  in  spite  of  the  remonstrances  of  an  unlucky  clergyman 
whom  Bacon  promptly  put  under  arrest.     Bacon  now  having 


1  It  is  remarkable  that  this  is  related  in  the  two  accounts  which  are  on  the  whole  friendly  to 
Bacon,  i.  e.,  Mrs.  Cotton's  and  the  Burwell  MS.,  while  nothing  is  said  of  it  by  the  Commis- 
sioners. 


DEA  TH  OF  BA  CON.  253 

secured  the  mainland,  made  all  preparations  for  an  attack  upon 
Accomac.  But  before  he  could  proceed  further,  his  health, 
which  had  been  for  some  time  past  tried  by  the  hardships 
of  Indian  warfare,  gave  way,  and  he  died,  asking  in  his  last 
moments,-  as  the  loyalists  complacently  observed,  for  the  services 
of  that  very  clergyman  whom  he  had  imprisoned.  As  is  usual 
with  opportune  deaths,  there  were  rumors  of  poison,  but  the  sus- 
picion seems  to  have  been  groundless.1  His  death  was  probably 
a  piece  of  good  fortune  for  the  colony.  All  that  could  be  done 
towards  redressing  real  grievances  and  establishing  real  reforms 
had  been  done  already.  Had  Bacon's  career  been  prolonged, 
he  might,  and  probably  would,  have  embroiled  the  colony  not 
only  with  Berkeley,  but  with  the  English  government,  and  fur- 
nished the  latter  with  a  pretext  for  interference  which  would 
have  done  irreparable  injury  to  the  growing  political  life  of  Vir- 
ginia. 

Bacon's  death  seems  to  have  been  the  signal  for  the  immediate 
break-up  of  his  party.  It  is  not  easy  to  reconcile  this  with  that 
Overthrow  apparently  overwhelming  ascendency  which  enabled 
insurgents,  the  triumphant  body  of  reformers  to  dictate  their  own 
laws,  to  drive  the  Governor  out  of  Jamestown,  and  to  force  him 
to  seek  safety  in  the  one  loyal  county  of  Accomac.  The  only 
reasonable  explanation  appears  to  be  that  the  men  who  supported 
Bacon  in  his  constitutional  reforms  had  fallen  away  from  him 
when  he  went  further,  and  were,  if  not  actually  hostile,  at  least 
unfavorable  to  his  proceedings  as  an  armed  rebel.  Moreover, 
with  the  death  of  Bacon  all  definiteness  and  unity  of  purpose 
seems  to  have  left  the  insurgents.  The  policy  with  which  Bacon 
had  set  out  manifestly  was  to  maintain  an  attitude  of  armed  re- 
sistance till  such  time  as  the  grievances  of  the  colony  could  be 
fairly  inquired  into  by  the  English  government.  His  successors 
seem  to  have  lost  all  principle  of  action  beyond  that  of  escaping 
the  wrath  of  Berkeley.  The  records  of  this  particular  period  are 
somewhat  confused,  but,  as  far  as  we  can  judge,  the  rebel  army 
broke  up  altogether,  and  its  principal  members  were  hunted  down 
and  arrested  with  little  difficulty  by  the  emissaries  of  the  Gov- 
ernor. Rapacious,  vindictive,  deaf,  and  probably  senile  in  mind, 
Berkeley  was  utterly  unfitted  to  sit  in  judgment  on  the  members 
of  a  defeated  faction.  Never,  too,  had  there  been  a  time  in 
English  history  when  the  war  of  parties  was  so  bloody,  and  when 

1  A  poem  quoted  in  the  Burwell  MS.  refers  to  "  Paracelsian  art." 


254  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

all  mercy  for  a  fallen  enemy  had  so  utterly  vanished.  It  would 
be  grossly  unjust  to  liken  Berkeley  to  Jeffries,  yet  the  temper  of 
the  Bloody  Assize  was  foreshadowed  in  the  sufferings  of  the  Vir- 
ginian rebels.1  Traditions  have  come  down  to  us  of  Berkeley's 
ferocious  reception  of  his  victims;  how  he  welcomed  Drummond 
who,  though  no  soldier,  was  Bacon's  chief  counselor,  with  a 
"  Mr.  Drummond,  you  are  very  welcome ;  I  am  more  glad  to  see 
you  than  any  man  in  Virginia ;  you  shall  be  hanged  in  half  an 
hour;  "2  and  how  when  the  wife  of  Colonel  Cheeseman  flung  her- 
self at  the  feet  of  the  Governor  in  an  agony  of  remorse  and  took 
on  herself  the  blame  of  her  husband's  treason,  she  was  thrust 
aside  with  a  foul  scoff.3  The  details  of  these  stories  may  be  ex- 
aggerated or  even  invented,  but  they  clearly  represent  a  general 
consensus  of  opinion  as  to  the  Governor's  conduct.  Nor  was 
Berkeley's  anger  merely  an  outburst  of  outraged  loyalty.  Meaner 
motives  were  mixed  with  it.  The  confiscations  of  the  civil  war 
had  begotten  a  lax  and  rapacious  tone  of  morality,  and  it  is  clear 
that  Berkeley  looked  on  rebel  estates  as  a  mediaeval  king  looked 
on  the  earnings  of  the  Jew  merchant,  or  as  an  Anglo-Indian  of 
the  last  century  looked  on  the  fortune  of  a  native  prince  with 
whom  the  Company  had  a  difference.4  He  would  not  have  de- 
liberately plundered  a  peaceful  citizen,  he  probably  would  have 
even  preferred  that  every  citizen  should  remain  loyal,  but  their 
disloyalty  threw  a  harvest  into  his  hands  of  which  he  must  make 
the  most.  Nor  were  underlings  wanting  to  aid  him.  Two 
among  his  instruments  stand  out  conspicuous :  Robert  Beverley, 
the  Clerk  of  the  Assembly,  and  one  Colonel  Hill.  The  former 
has  a  claim  to  our  notice  as  being  the  father  of  the  first  really  in- 
digenous historian  whom  Virginia  produced.  Our  knowledge  of 
the  latter  is  chiefly  derived  from  a  lengthy  document  drawn  up 
by  him  in  his  own  defense,  which  without  other  evidence  fur- 
nishes a  very  sufficient  condemnation. 

In  all  these  proceedings  Berkeley  seems  to  have  had  the  sup- 
port and  confidence  of  the  Assembly.  That  body  had  been 
Attitude  elected  in  the  beginning  of  1677.5  Of  the  circum- 
Assembiy.   stances  of  the  election  we  know  nothing.      One  is 

1  The  parallel  is  curiously  true  if  there  is  any  ground  for  a  statement  made  by  T.  M.  He 
mentions  (but  only  as  a  rumor)  that  Berkeley  had  private  instructions  from  the  Duke  of  York 
urging  him  to  severity. 

2  T.  M.,  p.  23.  s  Burwell  MS.,  p.  34. 

4  The  evidence  for  this  may  be  found  in  Berkeley's  own  letters  preserved  among  the  Colo- 
nial Papers. 
«  It  first  sat  February  20,  1677  (see  Hening),  but  the  date  of  election  is  not  mentioned, 


COMMISSIONERS  SENT  FR  OM  ENGLA  ND.  255 

tempted  to  think  that  Berkeley  must  have  packed  it  with  his  own 
creatures.  Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  it  seems  strange  that  the  ex- 
cluded party  should  have  sat  down  quietly  under  such  a  griev- 
ance. Nor  was  the  new  Assembly  wholly  hostile  to  the  political 
principles  advocated  by  Bacon,  since,  after  formally  repealing  all 
the  proceedings  of  the  previous  session  in  a  mass,  it  re-enacted 
some  of  the  principal  measures  of  reform.  At  the  same  time 
there  is  ample  evidence  that  it  was,  and  to  the  end  of  its  time  re- 
mained, loyal  to  Berkeley  and  his  party. 

While  these  things  were  doing  in  Virginia,  the  English  gov- 
ernment had  been  taking  active  measures.1  It  is  but  just  to  say 
commis-  tnat  tne  &>l°mal  policy  of  the  last  two  Stuart  reigns 
sioners  sent  showed  no  marked  traces  of  that  supineness  and  cor- 

out  from  L 

England,  ruption  which  had  invaded  nearly  every  department  of 
the  public  service.  On  this  occasion  the  Commissioners  for 
Plantations  seem  to  have  dealt  with  the  matter  both  promptly  and 
sagaciously.  The  news  of  Bacon's  first  action  against  the  gov- 
ernment was  sent  to  England  about  the  middle  of  June.  Berke- 
ley too  had  written  home  declaring  himself,  it  would  seem,  un- 
equal to  the  occasion,  and  soliciting  his  own  recall.  What  other 
information  the  Government  had  we  know  not,  but  it  seems 
pretty  clear  from  its  action  that  it  was  kept  well  informed  of  the 
turn  which  things  were  taking,  and  that  its  knowledge  was  not 
derived  wholly  from  the  Governor  and  his  supporters.  Moryson, 
one  of  the  three  agents,  was  yet  in  England,  and  we  may  well 
believe  that  he  was  a  means  of  communication  between  the  Eng- 
lish authorities  and  the  leading  men  of  the  colony.  •  In  September 
a  royal  pardon  was  sent  out,  promising  indemnity  to  all  who 
should  submit,  Bacon  only  excepted.  At  the  same  time  active 
measures  were  taken  for'  reducing  the  rebel  colony  to  order. 
Three  Commissioners  were  appointed,  of  whom  Moryson  was 
one.  This  appointment  was  a  guaranty  that  the  Commissioners 
would  enter  into  the  grievances  and  the  wants  of  the  colony.  A 
force  of  five  hundred  soldiers  was  equipped  and  sent  out  under 
the  command  of  the  senior  Commissioner,  Herbert  Jeffreys.  His 
two  colleagues,  Moryson  and  Berry,  seem  to  have  had  no  share 
in  the  military  department,  but  to  have  been  confined  to  the 
task  of  inquiring  into  grievances  and  reporting  on  the  state  of 
the  colony. 

1  My  account  of  what  follows  is  entirely  derived  from  the  Colonial  Papers,  chiefly  from  the 
MS.  report  of  the  Commissioners.  , 


256 


VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORA  TION. 


On  their  landing,  the  Commissioners  found  the  task  before 
them  somewhat  different  from  that  which  they  must  have  antici- 
Proceed-  pated..  Instead  of  having  to  support  Berkeley  and  the 
Cammis*-*16  established  authorities  against  the  insurgents,  it  was 
sioners.  their  chief  task  to  protect  the  insurgents  against  the 
fury  of  their  victorious  enemies.  The  conduct  of  the  Governor 
had  been  such  as  almost  to  place  him  in  the  attitude  of  a  rebel. 
Acting,  as  it  is  said,  by  the  advice  of  the  Council,  he  had  delib- 
erately suppressed  the  royal  proclamation  of  pardon,  and  had 
substituted  one  which  excluded  some  fifty  persons  from  its  bene- 
fits. Thus  when  the  Commissioners  landed,  about  fifteen  so- 
called  rebels  had  been  already  executed,  and,  though  all  resist- 
ance had  been  at  an  end  for  at  least  two  months,  martial  law 
was  still  in  full  force.  Moreover,  the  feeling  of  insecurity  which 
had  been  caused  by  Berkeley's  reckless  attacks  on  private  prop- 
erty had  almost  paralyzed  trade.  The  Commissioners  at  once 
remonstrated.  Berkeley's  treatment  of  their  complaint  is  almost 
ludicrous  in  its  serene  indifference  to  justice.  He  quotes  the 
confiscation  of  the  civil  war  as  a  precedent.  To  say  that  men's 
estates  were  not  to  be  seized  for  treason  before  conviction  was 
contrary  to  the  usage  of  all  nations.  The  Commissioners  then 
tried  an  appeal  to  Berkeley's  fears,  and  reminded  him  that  he 
would  have  to  give  a  strict  account  of  all  seizures.  In  spite  of 
the  efforts  of  the  Commissioners,  Berkeley  persisted  in  his  vio- 
lence. No  less  than  twenty-one  persons  were  put  to  death  after 
the  arrival  of  the  Commissioners.  The  Governor  even  justified 
the  continuance  of  martial  law  by  avowing  that  he  could  not 
trust  juries  to  convict.  Luckily,  Berkeley  had  put  a  weapon 
against  himself  into  the  hands  of  the  government  by  his  request 
to  be  recalled.  It  seems  as  if  he  wished  now  to  ignore  that 
application ;  but  the  authorities  at  home  stood  firm,  and,  despite 
his  violence  and  obstinacy,  Berkeley  had  to  give  way.  Still  he 
contrived  to  use  the  short  remainder  of  his  time  to  harass  the 
Commissioners  and  weaken  their  authority.  One  petty  dispute 
which  fills  no  small  place  in  the  correspondence  of  the  time  will 
serve  to  illustrate  the  relations  between  them.  We  find  the  Com- 
missioners gravely  complaining  that  the  Governor  had  on  one 
occasion  sent  them  from  his  house — in  his  own  carriage  indeed — 
but  with  the  common  hangman  acting  as  postilion.  They  seem 
to  have  suspected  that  Lady  Berkeley  was  responsible  for  this 
insult      Berkeley   meets  the  complaint  of  the  Commissioners 


PEACE  WITH  THE  INDIANS. 


257 


with  a  reply  in  which  he  likens  the  calumnies  brought  against 
him,  and  his  sufferings,  to  those  endured  by  the  Redeemer  of 
mankind !  Finally,  the  blame  of  the  outrage  seems  to  be  trans- 
ferred to  an  unhappy  negro. 

The  king  seems  to  have  been  willing  throughout  to  spare  the 
feelings  of  an  old  servant,  but  Berkeley's  insane  conduct  rendered 
Berkeley's  aa"  compromise  impossible.  At  length  in  April  he 
death.  obeyed  the  summons  of  recall.1  In  the  broken  state 
of  his  health  it  would  have  been  useless  cruelty  to  take  active 
measures  against  him.  Soon  after  his  return  he  died,  having  in 
the  last  two  years  of  his  life  hopelessly  tarnished  the  memory  of 
faithful  services  and  an  honorable  career. 

In  spite  of  all  the  hinderances  which  the  Commissioners  ex- 
perienced from  his  hostility,  they  succeeded  in  carrying  out  the 
The  Com-  main  objects  of  their  mission.  The  result  of  their 
Report?6"  labors  is  set  forth  in  a  connected  series  of  papers,  giv- 
ing a  clear  account  of  the  rebellion  and  of  the  circumstances 
which  led  to  it,  and  throwing  much  valuable  light  on  the  general 
condition  of  the  colony.  In  particular  they  obtained  from  each 
county  or  hundred  a  definite  statement  of  its  grievances.  These 
contain  but  little  new  information,  yet  they  are  of  great  value 
from  their  unanimity  and  from  the  confirmation  which  they  give 
to  all  the  vague  charges  brought  by  Bacon  and  his  supporters 
against  the  leading  men  in  the  colony  and  against  the  adminis- 
tration of  affairs.  They  show,  too,  that  the  grievances  were  not 
local,  and  that  the  inefficient  system  of  defense  against  the  In- 
dians was  not  resented  only  by  those  border  plantations  which 
were  specially  exposed. 

Besides  this  the  Commissioners  seem  to  have  carried  out  with 
thorough  success  the  task  of  establishing  friendly  relations  with 
Peace  with  the  savages.  This  was  accomplished  by  a  formal  peace 
dians""  in  May,  1677.  By  this  the  Indians  acknowledged  the 
sovereignty  of  the  king  of  England  and  bound  themselves  to 
pay  a  nominal  quit-rent  of  three  arrows  and  a  tribute  of  beaver 
skins.  In  return  no  Indian  might  be  imprisoned  but  by  a  regular 
warrant ;  certain  territories  were  to  be  reserved  for  them  as  in- 
alienable, and  they  were  allowed  rights  of  fishing  and  oyster- 
gathering  within  the  English  territory.  The  treaty  was  formally 
concluded  at  a  meeting  between  the  Commissioners  and  the  prin- 
cipal Indian  potentates,  among  whom  we  find  two  female  chiefs, 

1  Hening,  vol.  ii.  p.  558.  17 


258 


VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORA  TION. 


The  peace  thus  secured  proved  lasting.  Henceforth  the  Indian 
almost  disappears  from  Virginian  history,  whether  as  an  object  of 
dread  or  of  romantic  interest.1 

Prudent  and  able  though  the  conduct  of  the  Commissioners 
was,  it  was  beyond  their  power  to  allay  those  discontents  which 
Further  nac^  culminated  in  the  late  rebellion.  In  one  way, 
discontent,  indeed,  the  very  moderation  of  the  crown  and  the 
Commissioners  imbittered  matters,  by  kindling  the  hostility  of 
what  had  been  hitherto  the  loyal  party.  The  Commissioners  had 
demanded  access  to  the  papers  of  the  Assembly.  The  latter 
body  not  merely  refused  this,  but  over  and  above  passed  a  resolu- 
tion formally  recording  their  condemnation  of  the  demand  as  un- 
constitutional. As  the  Assembly  was  that  which  had  supported 
Berkeley  in  his  severities,  and  as  Beverley  was  one  of  its  princi- 
pal officials,  we  must  suppose  that  the  members  were  actuated 
rather  by  a  sense  of  their  own  outraged  dignity  and  by  a  revenge- 
ful feeling  to  those  who  had  opposed  the  late  Governor,  than  by 
any  sincere  regard  for  popular  liberty.  At  the  same  time  the 
Commissioners  and  the  English  government  made  themselves 
hostile  to  the  bulk  of  the  tax-payers  by  imposing  on  them  the  bur- 
den of  a  military  establishment,  while  the  soldiers  themselves 
were  becoming  disaffected  at  the  tardiness  with  which  the  Assem- 
bly voted  their  pay. 

The  ill-timed  arrival  of  the  news  of  the  rebellion  had  frustrated 
the  efforts  of  the  agency  and  had  finally  put  a  stop  to  the  attempt 
to  secure  a  charter  in  which  the  rights  of  the  colonists  should  be 
formally  embodied.  The  rebellion,  too,  had  brought  material 
distress  in  its  train,  and  the  overproduction  of  tobacco,  coupled 
with  the  rivalry  of  the  Maryland  and  Carolina  planters,  had  in- 
jured the  one  staple  industry  of  the  country. 

To  remedy  these  discontents  would  have  taxed  the  powers  of 
an  able  and  energetic  administrator.  As  it  was,  the  death  of 
Jeffreys  left  the  supreme  power  for  two  years  in  the  hands  of  a 
Lieutenant-Governor,  Sir  Henry  Chicheley,  a  man  well  disposed 
and  moderate,  as  it  would  seem,  but  without  even  capacity  enough 
for  the  every-day  duties  of  a  colonial  administrator  in  quiet  times. 

In  1682  he  was  replaced  by  Lord  Culpepper.  In  him  we 
have  a  colonial  statesman  of  a  type  which  that  generation  had 

1  The  treaty  is  preserved,  printed  among  the  Colonial  Papers.  There  is  also  a  letter  from 
the  Commissioners  describing  the  various  Indian  chiefs  who  ratified  the  treaty.  The  appear- 
ance of  the  Queen  of  Pamunkey  is  described  with  as  much  minuteness  as  if  a  royal  alliance 
had  been  contemplated. 


LORD  CULPEPPER.  259 

not  seen  before.  Berkeley  and  his  chief  counselors  were  men 
who  had  learned  to  regard  Virginia  as  a  home,  England  but 
LordXuU  as  the  name  of  a  distant  and  overruling  power.  Such 
made1-  men  might  err  through  personal  defects  of  mind  or 
Governor.  ..temper,  through  narrow  and  imperfect  views  as  to  the 
wants  of  the  colony,  or  through  sympathies  and  interests  which 
unduly  swayed  them  towards  one  party.  But  they  looked  on 
public  questions  as  men  whose  prospects  and  purposes  bound 
them  to  the  colony.  They  were  not,  like  the  earlier  and  later 
Governors  of  Virginia,  like  Dale  and  Culpepper,  men  who  came 
out  to  discharge  a  temporary  trust,  possibly  with  a  due  regard  to 
the  interests  of  the  colony,  but  without  having  any  personal  stake 
in  its  future. 

Culpepper  himself  seems  to  have  been  neither  better  nor  worse 
than  most  public  men  in  that  corrupt  age.  He  appears  to  have 
His  char-  keen  placable  and  conciliatory  in  temper  and  to  have 
after.  shown  no    lack  of  intelligence  as  an    administrator. 

His  worse  fault  was  rapacity,  of  which  he  stands  convicted,  both 
*  by  general  tradition  and  certain  specific  actions.  Yet  even  here 
■Borne  part  of  the  discredit  he  incurred  was  doubtless  due  to  his 
peculiar  relations  towards  the  colony.  He  had,  as  we  have  seen, 
been  the  final  recipient  of  that  unjustifiable  grant  which  had  ne- 
cessitated the  agency,  and  had  thus  been  in  some  measure  the 
parent  of  the  recent  troubles.  Thus  he  began  his  career  in  Vir- 
ginia saddled  with  the  reputation  of  an  unscrupulous  extortioner, 
and  at  enmity  with  no  small  portion  of  the  community. 

The  instructions  with  which  Culpepper  was  sent  out  were  not^ 
such  as  to  lessen  the  disfavor  with  which  he  was  regarded.  They 
His  in-  were  designed  to  leave  the  Virginians  little  more  than 
struftions.i  the  empty  show  of  self-government,  stripped  of  all  vi- 
tality and  force.-  The  franchise  was  to  be  once  more  restricted 
to  householders  and  freeholders.  Assemblies  were  only  to  be 
summoned  by  the  special  direction  of  the  crown.  Laws  were  no 
longer  to  originate  with  the  Assembly,  but  to  be  drafted  by  the 
Governor  and  Council,  by  them  transmitted  to  the  crown,  and 
then  returned  in  such  form  as  seemed  best,  for  the  Virginian  As- 
sembly to  reject  or  accept  as  it  should  think  fit. 

This  new  system  of  legislation  was  to  be  at  once  practically 
applied.     Three  laws  were  drafted  and  entrusted  to  Culpepper 

1  Culpepper's  instructions,  the  three  laws,  the  questions  given  to  him,  and  his  answers,  are 
all  copied  into  Entry  Book,  No.  lxxx.  * 


260  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

for  the  consideration  of  the  Assembly.  Two  of  these,  one  foi 
pardon,  the  other  for  indemnity,  related  to  the  late  troubles,  while 
a  third  enabled  the  Governor  to  naturalize  foreigners.  Culpep- 
per at  the  same  time  was  instructed  to  administer  a  formal  reproof 
to  the  Assembly  for  that  resolution  which  denied  the  Commis- 
sioners access  to  the  records.  Two  other  measures  were  included 
in  Culpepper's  instructions,  which,  though  good  in  themselves, 
were  not  calculated  to  allay  discontent..  The  remission  of  quit- 
rents  for  the  first  seven  years  of  occupancy  was  abolished,  and 
all  grants  of  land  which  were  allowed  to  remain  idle  for  seven 
years  were  then  to  become  void.  Equitable  as  the  latter  meas- 
ure was,  it  must  have  come  with  a  strangely  ill  grace  through  the 
mouth  of  a  Governor  who  was  himself  enjoying  the  quit-rents  of 
an  enormous  territory  on  which  he  had  never  expended  a  single 
farthing. 

One  more  point  connected  with  these  instructions. is  too  im- 
portant to  be  overlooked.  They  aimed,  as  we  have  seen,  at  re- 
ducing popular  government  almost  to  a  nullity.  Yet  in  one 
matter,  the  most  important  perhaps  of  all,  the  liberties  of  the  col- 
onists were  left  intact.  Culpepper  was  instructed  to  "  recom- 
mend "  the  Assembly  to  consider  a  more  equal  and  acceptable 
manner  of  raising  money  than  that  in  force  at  present,  while 
money  bills,  in  case  of  emergency,  were  the  one  department  of 
independent  legislation  in  which  an  initiative  was  left  to  the 
colonists. 

Culpepper  showed  no  alacrity  in  carrying  out  the  more  unpop- 
?ular  portions  of  his  instructions.  The  first  clause  of  them  com- 
His  re  ort  Pe^e(^  mm  t0  senc*  nome  a  detailed  report  of  the  man- 
ner in  which  he  had  executed  each  several  instruction. 
His  answers,  while  professing  to  give  an  exhaustive  account  of 
his  proceedings,  were  on  the  more  important  points  a  series  of 
elaborate  subterfuges.  At  the  earnest  request  of  the  Council,  he 
forbore  to  reprove  the  Assembly  for  their  obnoxious  resolution. 
He  induced  the  Assembly  to  pass  the  Acts  of  pardon  and  indem- 
-jiity,  though  not  without  amendment.  The  Act  for  naturaliza- 
tion he  ignored  altogether.  As  to  the  future  arrangement  about 
Assemblies,  he  pleads  the  king's  permission  vto  allow  the  matter 
to  remain  in  abeyance  for  six  months.  Having  thus  ingeniously 
released  himself  from  the  most  onerous  portion  of  his  instruc- 
tions, he  proceeds  to  answer  the  questions  submitted  to  him  fully 
And  explicitly,  with  every  appearance  of  frankness,  and  with  a 


THE  TOBACCO-CUTTING  RIOT.  261 

detail  and  clearness  which  do  no  small  credit  either  to  his  own 
powers  or  those  of  his  secretary. 

One  point  in  his  first  dispatch  is  worth  noting,  as  being  per- 
haps the  first  definite  avowal  of  that  desire  for  unity  which  was 
forcing  itself  on  colonial  politicians.  Culpepper  proposes  that 
none  of  the  American  plantations  sliould  be  allowed  to  make 
peace  or  war  without  the  knowledge  and  approval  of  the  Gov- 
ernor and  Council  of  Virginia,  the  one  colony  on  whose  loyalty 
the  crown  could  reckon.  Considering  the  attitude  of  the  colo- 
nists to  their  Indian  neighbors,  such  an  arrangement  would  have 
been  wholly  impracticable.  Yet  the  suggestion  is  interesting  as 
marking,  perhaps,  the  earliest  definite  recognition  of  the  need  for 
some  sort  of  federal  union. 

The  one  point  on  which  Culpepper  seems  to  have  been  really 
anxious  was  to  get  away  with  all  speed,  and  in  seven  months 
The  to-  fr°m  tne  time  °f  ms  lading  he  departed  for  England, 
cuttkf  leaving  the  colony  under  the  command  of  Chicheley  as 
«°t.  Lieutenant-Governor.1     Under  his  feeble  rule,  Virginia 

narrowly  escaped  a  second  rebellion.2  Many  of  the  planters, 
among  whom  Beverley  seems  to  have  been  foremost,  considered 
that  the  commercial  interests  of  the  colony  would  be  benefited  by 
a  temporary  suspension  of  tobacco-planting.  Accordingly  a  bill 
was  brought  in  with  this  object.  The  measure  was  lost.  There- 
upon the  advocates  of  suspension  sought  to  do  by  violence  what 
they  had  failed  to  do  legally.  They  assembled  in  force  and  cut 
down  the  tobacco  crop  on  several  plantations.  The  ringleaders 
were  arrested.  Three  were  hanged,  the  rest  pardoned,  one  on  the 
peculiar  condition  that  he  built  a  bridge.  Beverley  was  one  of  the 
chief  offenders.  The  Council  issued  an  order  that  he  should  be  ar- 
rested, and  should  surrender  all  the  public  documents  in  his  pos- 
session. For  nearly  two  years  the  chief  public  event  in  the  col- 
ony was  an  undignified  chase  after  the  Clerk  of  the  Assembly, 
with  varied  episodes  of  escape  and  recapture.  The  temper  of 
his  assailants  was  sufficiently  shown  by  their  refusing  him  a  writ 

1  Culpepper's  arrival  in  May  is  fixed  by  his  own  report  in  Entry  Book,  No.  lxxx.  p.  378, 
and  his  departure  in  December  by  a  letter  from  Spencer,  ib.,  p.  396. 

These  Entry  Books,  to  which  I  shall  henceforth  often  refer,  contain  authoritative  and,  I 
believe,  contemporary  copies  of  the  more  important  colonial  documents. 

2  Our  knowledge  of  this  tobacco-cutting  riot  is  derived  from  the  Report  of  the  Council, 
Hening,  vol.  ii.  p.  562,  from  two  letters  written  by  Sir  Henry  Chicheley,  one  a  formal  dis- 
patch to  the  Lords  of  Plantations,  the  other  a  letter  to  Secretary  Jenkins,  both  very  confused 
documents,  and  from  a  letter  written  by  Secretary  Spencer.  These  are  copied  in  Entry  Book, 
No.  lxxxii. 


262  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

of  habeas  corpus,  on  the  ground  that  the  king  must  first  be  con- 
sulted. Finally,  in  May,  1684,  he  was  bound  over  to  keep  the 
peace  and  set  at  liberty. 

While  the  trial  of  the  plant-cutters  was  yet  pending,  Culpep- 
per returned.  His  attempts  to  evade  his  orders,  and  thus  stand 
Culpepper's  well  both  with  the  colonists  and  the  government  at 
tration  "  home,  were  no  longer  successful.  The  Lords  Com- 
Sffficulties.  missioners  condemned  the  proceedings  of  Culpeppei 
and  the  Council  concerning  the  resolution  of  the  Assembly,  and 
returned  to  the  attack.  They  instructed  the  Governor  to  draw 
up  an  order  expressing  his  displeasure  at  the  conduct  of  the  Bur- 
gesses, and  requiring  that  the  obnoxious  resolution  should  be 
erased,  while  the  Assembly  was,  if  possible,  to  be  forced  into 
pronouncing  its  own  condemnation  by  a  resolution  censuring  the 
previous  one.  How  far  these  instructions  were  carried  out  does 
not  appear. 

Another  point  in  Culpepper's  instructions  struck  directly  at  the 
rights  and  liberties  of  the  Assembly.  He  was  to  claim  the  right 
of  suspending  Councilors,  who  should  thereby  be  rendered  inel- 
igible for  election  as  Burgesses.  In  defense  of  this  measure  it 
was  alleged  that  Berkeley  might  have  checked  Bacon's  insurrec- 
tion at  the  outset,  if  it  had  been  in  his  power  to  suspend  the 
Councilors  who  favored  the  rebel  leader.1  This  measure  would 
have  enabled  the  crown,  with  the  aid  of  an  unscrupulous  Gov- 
ernor, to  get  rid  of  any  obnoxious  politician  by  first  appointing 
him  to  the  Council  and  then  removing  him.  The  measure  was 
to  be  at  once  put  in  force  against  Beverley  and  Hill.  Here, 
again,  Culpepper  declined  to  oppose  himself  to  popular  feeling, 
and  by  the  advice  of  his  Council,  postponed  the  measure.2 

In  another  of  its  aggressive  attempts  the  crown  fared  better. 
Yet  here  its  success  seems  to  have  been  due  partly  to  the  ill- 
judged  policy  of  the  Assembly,  and  partly  to  the  fact  that  Cul- 
pepper's own  interests  were  enlisted  in  the  question.  Hitherto 
the  Assembly  had  enjoyed  the  powers  of  a  court  of  appeal.  An 
order  was  made  that  no  appeal  should  be  heard  except  in  cases 
of  three  hundred  pounds  value,  and  that  in  such  cases  the  appeal 
should  be  direct  to  the  crown.  This  measure  was  reluctantly 
accepted  by  the  Assembly.  If  we  may  believe  Beverley,  that 
body  had  only  itself  to  blame.     The  crown,  he  says,  had  no  wish 

1  The  Present  State  of  Virginia  (1727),  by  Blair,  Hartwell,  and  Chiltern. 
*  Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  lxxx. 


LORD  HOWARD.  263 

to  alter  the  existing  law,  till  the  Burgesses  stirred  up  the  question 
by  claiming  the  right  to  hear  appeals  as  a  single  chamber,  apart 
from  the  Council,  on  the  ground,  not  unreasonable  in  itself,  that 
the  Council  had  already,  as  a  court  of  law,  expressed  its  opinion. 
He  adds  that  Culpepper  himself,  foreseeing  the  result,  instigated 
the  Burgesses  to  claim  this  right,  and  that  his  position  as  a  great 
landholder,  with  a  somewhat  uncertain  title,  gave  him  a  personal 
interest  in  the  change.1 

The  official  records  of  the  time,  while  they  show  us  Culpepper 
in  almost  constant  disobedience  to  the  crown,  tell  us  little  of  his 
relations  to  the  colonists.  Later  tradition  represents  him  as  actu- 
ated throughout  his  whole  career  by  the  meanest  rapacity,  losing 
no  opportunity  of  increasing  his  own  emoluments,  and  endeav- 
oring to  swindle  the  colonists  by  paying  the  public  wages  in  light 
coin,  on  which  he  had  himself  put  an  arbitrary  value.2 

His  supineness  in  enforcing  the  authority  of  the  crown  could 
not  fail  to  exasperate  the  king  and  his  advisers,  and  before  long 
Culpepper  gave  them  an  opportunity  of  punishing  him,  and  re- 
placing him  by  a  more  efficient  instrument.  An  Order  of  Council 
had  been  issued  in  .1680  forbidding  any  colonial  governor  to  ab- 
sent himself  from  his  province  without  special  leave.  After  a 
second  stay  of  about  half  a  year,  Culpepper  returned  to  England 
on  the  pretext  that  the  state  of  the  colony  required  him  to  report 
in  person  to  the  crown.  There  was  nothing  in  the  case  to  justify 
this  deliberate  contempt  of  orders,  and  Culpepper  was  at  once 
deprived  of  office.  Two  years  later  he  abandoned  the  larger 
share  of  his  Virginian  grant,  retaining  only  a  portion  of  the  ter- 
ritory called  the  Northern  Neck,  and  securing,  instead  of  the  re- 
mainder, an  annual  pension  of  six  hundred  pounds  for  twenty 
years.3 

Lord  Howard  of  Effingham  seems  to  have  possessed  all  the 
defects  of  his  predecessor  without  his  few  redeeming  qualities. 
Lord  There  was  in  truth  some  similarity  between  each  Gov- 

sucMeks  to  ernor  and  the  king  whom  he  served.  Culpepper  was 
norsWp^"  grasping  and  unscrupulous  and  apparently  without  the 
faintest  sense  of  puublic  duty.  Yet,  like  Charles,  he  seems  to 
have  possessed  a  conciliatory  demeanor  and  a  power  of  self- 
restraint  in  trifles  which  tempered  the  hostility  of  those  whom  he 
wronged.  Howard,  like  James,  had  not  the  ingenuity  to  disguise 
his  arbitrary  measures  under  any  show  of  lawfulness  or  reason. 

1  Beverley,  p.  82.  2  lb.,  p.  80. 

3  All  these  events  are  recorded  in  the  Colonial  Papers  under  their  respective  dates. 


264  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

His  instructions  confirm  in  one  important  point  what  we  have 
already  learned  from  those  given  to  Culpepper.  Whatever  may 
His  in-  ^ave  keen  tne  doctrine  of  the  next  century,  it  is  clear  that 
struftions.i  the  most  arbitrary  of  our  later  kings,  supported  by  the 
most  subservient  of  his  creatures,  recognized  the  exclusive  right 
of  the  Virginian  legislature  to  impose  their  own  taxes.  In  all 
matters  concerning  taxation  Howard  is  to  "  re£0«K$end  "  the  As- 
sembly to  adopt  certain  measures.  Such  a  recommendation 
might  be  in  reality  a  serious  interference  with  the  rights  of  the 
Assembly,  but  it  left  those  rights  unimpaired,  at  least  in  form,  and 
furnished  the  colonists  with  a  constitutional  standing-ground  for 
the  future  defense  of  their  liberties. 

The  only  other  noteworthy  point  in  Howard's  instructions  was 
a  clause  which  empowered  him  to  grant  liberty  of  conscience  to 
Nonconformists.  In  this  we  see  a  foreshadowing  of  what  was 
afterwards  the  avowed  policy  of  the  court  in  protecting  dissent 
at  the  expense  of  constitutional  principles. 

We  have  more  than  once  seen  how  the  political  life  and  public 
morality  of  Virginia  took  their  color  from  those  of  the  mother 
His  career  country.  In  his  reckless  disregard  for  constitutional 
erno°.v"  rights,  in  his  defiance  of  public  feeling,  and  in  the 
astounding  folly  with  which  he  alienated  those  whom  ordinary 
forbearance  would  have  propitiated,  Howard  was  a  worthy  coun- 
terpart of  his  royal  master.2  The  claim  to  a  dispensing  power 
was  exactly  paralleled  by  Howard's  contention  that  the  Governor 
had  a  right  to  repeal  the  Acts  of  the  Assembly  at  his  discretion. 
The  protest  of  the  Assembly  against  this  monstrous  doctrine  was 
treated  as  contumacious.  When  a  meeting  was  held  in  the  once 
conspicuously  loyal  county  of  Accomac  to  consider  public  griev- 
ances, it  was  summarily  stopped  by  a  member  of  Council.  No 
proper  accounts  were  given  of  the  public  funds,  and  the  rights  of 
the  subject  were  interfered  with  by  arbitrary  imprisonment.  Not 
only  was  Beverley  deprived  of  all  employment,  but  Ludwell,  a 
man  whose  whole  career  had  been  that  of  a  loyal  and  temperate 
citizen,  was  deposed  from  his  place  in  Council  and  reported  to 
the  English  Government  as  a  disaffected  person  who  only  at- 
tended Council  to  oppose  the  king's  interest,  instead  of  advo- 
cating it,  as  he  should  have  done.     As  a  concluding  proof  of 

1  Howard's  instructions  are  given  in  Eutry  Book,  No.  lxxxi.  pp.  218,  261. 

2  His  misdeeds  are  set  forth  in  a  petition  from  Ludwell,  dated  September  19,  1689,  and 
transcribed  in  Entry  Book,  No.  lxxxiii.  Howard's  answer  is  given  in  the  same  Entry  Book. 
It  is  of  a  very  flimsy  character,  and  practically  acknowledges  the  charges  brought  against  him. 


UO  WARD'S  FOLIC  Y. 


265 


Ludwell's  baseness,  Howard  mentions  that  a  collector's  place  had 
been  wasted  in  the  vain  attempt  to  buy  him  over.1 

Most  of  these  proceedings  were  only  transitory  attacks  on 
private  or  public  rights.  One  of  Howard's  aggressions  had  a 
more  lasting  influence.  On  the  pretext  of  Beverley's  misconduct 
he  deprived  the  Burgesses  of  the  power  of  electing  their  own 
clerk,  and  transferred  it  to  the  crown.  It  was  but  lately  that  the 
Burgesses  had  acquired  the  right  of  sitting  as  a  separate  cham- 
ber apart  from  the  Council,  and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  this  change 
had  given  them  greater  power  of  independent  action  which 
Howard's  measure  was  designed  to  thwart.  The  effect  of  it  was 
to  make  the  clerk  the  creature  of  the  crown,  whereby  it  became 
impossible  for  the  Burgesses  to  draft  a  petition  or  to  adopt  any 
measure  of  self-defense  without  the  knowledge  of  the  Governor 
and  Council.2 

In  one  important  point  Howard  outdid  the  misdeeds  of  his 
master.  Among  the  many  faults  of  James  II.  rapacity  found  at 
least  no  conspicuous  place.  Howard  begins  his  colonial  career 
in  the  true  spirit  of  a  place-hunting  courtier  by  petitioning  for 
Baltimore's  patent  in  the  event  of  its  being  forfeited  by  miscon- 
duct.3 He  is  charged  with  having  imposed  an  elaborate  and 
extortionate  scale  of  stamp  duties,  and  it  was  one  of  his  griev- 
ances against  the  colonists  that  they  lessened  his  emoluments  by 
paying  their  dues  in  tobacco  instead  of  specie.4 

In  Virginia  the  second  overthrow  of  the  house  of  Stuart,  like 
the  first,  was  affected  with  tranquillity  and  ease.  Torpor  seems 
The  revo-  to  have  followed  that  overstrained  excitement  which 
Virginia!  had  shown  itself  in  Bacon's  rebellion  and  in  the 
troubles  which  followed.  Under  the  corrupt  government  of  Cul- 
pepper and  his  successor,  political  life  had  stagnated.  The  clause 
in  Culpepper's  instructions  which  limited  Assemblies  to  special 
occasions  was  no  dead  letter,  and  for  five  years  none  met.  All 
that  we  know  of  the  state  of  affairs  during  the  revolution  is  de- 
rived from  private  letters,  which  speak  vaguely  of  the  possibility 
of  disturbances  and  of  the  dread  of  an  attack  by  the  Papists  of 
Maryland.5  The  proclamation  of  the  accession  of  William  and 
Mary  at  once  restored  tranquillity,  and  the  life    of  the  colony 

1  Howard  to  the  President  of  the  Council  for  Trade,  May,  1687.  Colonial  Entry  Book, 
No.  Ixxxiii.  p.  125. 

2  Present  State,  pp.  28,  40. 

3  The  letter  of  May,  1687,  before  referred  to. 

4  Beverley,  pp.  85,  86.     Letter  of  May,  1687. 
6  Letter  from  Secretary  Spencer,  April,  1689. 


266  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

went  on  peacefully  and,  as  far  as  appears,  without  the  change  of 
a  single  official. 

It  seems  strange  that  the  new  government  should  have  retained 
in  office  such  a  man  as  Howard,  corrupt  and  incompetent  in  his 
administration,  a  Papist,  and  a  supporter  and  imitator  of  James's 
worst  measures.  The  evil,  however,  was  soon  modified  by  a 
remedy,  equally  bad  in  itself  though  in  this  single  instance  pro- 
ductive of  no  small  good.  Howard  was  allowed  to  retain  his 
office  as  an  absentee  with  half  his  salary,  while  his  duties  were 
discharged  by  a  lieutenant.  But  before  this  arrangement  was 
made  Howard  had  received  fresh  instructions  from  the  English 
government  which  are  not  without  their  interest.  The  order  re- 
stricting the  franchise  to  householders  and  freeholders  was  form- 
ally re-enacted.  In  two  points  the  Governor  was  brought 
more  directly  under  the  control  of  the  authorities  in  England. 
If  he  ever  failed  to  send  over  the  Acts  of  the  Assembly  for  the 
approval  of  the  crown,  he  was  to  be  mulcted  of  a  year's  salary. 
His  power  of  suspending  Councilors  was  restricted  by  a  resolu- 
tion that  it  was  not  to  be  applied  without  special  reasons,  and  that 
a  statement  of  the  grounds  for  suspension  was  to  be  laid  before 
the  crown.  The  most  important  part  of  the.  instructions  is  the 
clearness  and  fullness  with  which  they  recognize  the  right  of  tax- 
•  ation  as  vested  in  the  Assembly.  As  before,  certain  taxes  are  to 
be  "  recommended  "  for  their  consideration.  The  Assembly  is  to 
be  "  persuaded  "  to  pass  an  Act  by  which  the  Governor  and 
Council  should  be  allowed  in  cases  of  emergency  to  impose  a 
duty,  such  duty  to  be  accounted  for  at  the  next  Assembly.  It 
would  be  difficult  to  imagine  a  clearer  or  more  definite  acknowl- 
edgment of  those  rights  for  which  the  Virginians  did  battle  eighty 
years  later.1 

Howard's  incompetence  was  not  without  its  compensating  ad- 
vantages, since  it  brought  on  to  the  stage  of  Virginian  politics 
Lieutenant-  the  ablest  man  who  had  figured  there  since  the  days  of 
Nicholson.  Dale  and  Delaware.  Francis  Nicholson,  who  was  now 
appointed  Lieutenant-Governor,  and  who  discharged  all  the  du- 
ties of  his  absent  chief,  had  already  played  a  part,  though  no  very 
distinguished  or  creditable  one,  in  colonial  politics.  He  had 
been  in  command  of  a  troop  of  infantry  with  which  James  II 
had  sought  to  overawe  the  upholders  of  popular  rights  in  his  own 
colony  of  New  York.     Subsequently  he  had  been  promoted   to 

1  These  instructions  are  in  h?itry  Book,  No.  lxxxiii.  p.  306. 


FRANCIS  NICHOLSON. 


267 


be  Lieutenant-Governor  of  the  same  colony,  and  had  fallen  a 
victim  to  that  outburst  of  popular  fury  which  swept  away  the 
creatures  of  the  fallen  dynasty.  The  facility  with  which  he 
transferred  his  services  to  the  new  powers  shows  that  his  no- 
tions of  fidelity  did  not  rise  above  the  usual  standard  of  his 
age.  We  may  believe,  too,  without  accepting  all  the  charges  made 
against  his  private  character,  that  it  was  of  the  pattern  current  at 
Whitehall  in  the  days  of  Sedley  and  Grammont.  But  it  is  no 
small  praise  of  a  public  man  trained  in  such  a  school  to  say  that 
he  was  guiltless  of  all  attacks  on  private  rights,  that  he  was  clean- 
handed as  a  governor  and  a  judge,  and  that  he  was  honestly  and 
laboriously  attentive  to  me  welfare  of  those  under  his  rule.  Nich- 
olson, too,  stands  out  as  something  more  than  an  efficient  and  up- 
right administrator.  To  him  more  than  to  any  one  man  of  that 
age  belongs  the  credit  of  clearly  seeing  and  setting  forth  that 
policy  which  the  two  next  generations  of  statesmen  adopted  to- 
wards the  colonies. 

His  views  on  the  subject  are  already  set  forth  in  the  vigorous 
dispatches  which  he  sent  from  Virginia.1  They  clearly  mark  a 
departure  from  the  earlier  traditions  of  colonial  policy.  The 
original  founders  of  Virginia  sought  to  establish  a  self-supporting 
community  with  varied  forms  of  productive  industry.  The  natu- 
ral conditions  of  climate  and  soil  had  decreed  otherwise,  and  had 
forced  the  colony  to  depend  on  that  one  commodity  which  could 
be  produced  most  efficiently  and  cheaply.  Looking  to  the  social 
and  political  welfare' of  the  colony,  the  failure  of  all  attempts  to 
introduce  manufactures  to  vary  production  was  to  be  deplored. 
But  a  statesman  who  considered  the  economical  welfare  of  the 
empire  as  a  whole  would  have  preferred  that  the  resources  of 
Virginia  should  be  employed  to  the  utmost  profit  by  being  ex- 
clusively devoted  to  tobacco.  Such  was  the  view  set  forth  by 
Nicholson  in  the  vigorous  dispatches  which  he  sent  home  from 
Virginia.  He  implores  the  home  government  to  see  that  the  sup- 
ply of  commodities  for  the  colonists,  especially  of  clothing,  be 
exported  in  sufficient  quantities  and  without  delay,  otherwise,  he 
says,  they  will  out  of  necessity  take  to  manufactures  instead  of 
tobacco-planting,  and  the  king's  revenue  will  suffer.  To  us 
Nicholson's  view  may  seem  narrow  rather  than  enlightened,  but  it 
was  something,  in  an  age  when  economical  science  hardly  exist- 

1  These  dispatches  will  be  found  among  the  Colonial  Papers  referring  to  Virginia  about 
1690.     In  mere  style  they  are  far  above  most  of  the  documents  which  bear  on  our  subject. 


26S  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

ed,  to  grasp  and  formulate  definitely  the  sound  principles  ol 
commerce. 

In  another  and  a  worthier  manner  Nicholson  anticipated  the 
ideas  of  a  later  day.  He  saw  that  the  danger  of  French  en- 
croachment was  making  some  kind  of  union  between  the  colo- 
nies a  necessity.  We  find  him,  while  Governor  of  Virginia,  casting 
a  vigilant  eye  on  the  other  colonies,  inquiring  into  their  means  of 
defense,  and  conferring,  both  in  person  and  by  deputy,  with  the 
local  authorities  in  the  Northern  plantations.  Following  up  and 
carrying  yet  further  the  suggestion  made  by  Culpepper,  he  ad- 
vocates a  defensive  confederation  of  the  colonies  under  the  su- 
premacy of  the  loyal  colony  of  VirginiaP 

The  same  clear-sighted  energy  marked  his  whole  administrative 
career.  Immediately  on  his  arrival  he  proceeded  to  correct  the 
reports  sent  home  by  his  superior  as  to  the  military  condition  of 
the  colony.  Howard  had  given  a  rose-colored  report  of  the  for- 
tifications and  of  the  efficiency  of  the  militia.  On  both  these 
points  Nicholson  at  once  reports  the  urgent  need  of  reform.  The 
forts,  he  says,  are  dilapidated,  and  the  militia  badly  organized 
and  ill  disciplined. 

The  most  conspicuous  feature  in  Nicholson's  policy  had  to  do 
with  the  educational  and  religious  condition  of  the  colony.  The 
The  church  neglect  of  these  matters  had  been  for  nearly  half  a 
ginia.r"  century  a  constant  cause  of  complaint.  Acts  had  been 
passed  for  the  maintenance  of  the  clergy,  for  the  preservation  of 
churches,  and  for  the  foundation  of  schools.1  In  1661  a  Vir- 
ginian clergyman,  Philip  Mallory,  was  sent  to  England  by  the 
Assembly  to  lay  before  the  crown  the  state  of  religion  in  the  col- 
ony.2 In  the  same  year  the  condition  of  the  Church  in  the  plan- 
tations generally,  and  more  especially  in  Virginia,  was  brought 
before  the  notice  of  Sheldon,  with  a  scheme  for  the  establish- 
ment of  a  bishopric  and  the  insuring  a  more  liberal  and  certain 
emolument  to  the  clergy,  aided  by  missionary  fellowships  in  the 
two  universities.3  The  project  was  even  carried  so  far  that  a 
bishop  was  actually  chosen.  But  probably  some  court  intrigue 
stood  in  the  way,  and  Virginia  was  left  in  the  state  of  spiritual 
destitution  described  by  Hammond  and  Berkeley.4     They  tell  us 

1  Hening,  vol.  i.  pp.  121,  160.  2  lb.,  vol.  ii.  p.  34. 

8  Virginia' s  Cure,  by  R.  G.     Published  in  Force,  vol.  iii. 

4  Anderson's  History  of  the  Colonial  Church,  1856,  vol.  iii.  p.  358.  He  refers  to  Gadsden's 
Life  of  Bishop  Dehon,  an  American  work  of  the  present  century.  I  should  infer  that  Ander- 
son had  also  other  authorities.  The  laborious  and  trustworthy  character  of  his  book  is 
stamped  on  every  page. 


THE  CHURCH  IN  VIRGINIA. 


269 


that  the  Virginia  clergy  "  paddled  in  factions  and  state  matters," 
that  they  were  "  such  as  wore  black  coats  and  could  gabble  in  a 
plupit,  roar  in  a  tavern,  exact  from  their  parishes,  and  rather  by 
their  dissoluteness  destroy  than  feed  their  flock,"1  and  that  "  as  of 
all  other  commodities,  so  of  these,  the  worst  are  sent  to  us."2 
The  size  of  the  parishes,  sometimes  stretching  for  seventy  miles 
along  the  banks  of  a  river,  made  it  impossible  for  a  single  minis- 
ter to  exercise  any  due  control  or  supervision,  or  even  to  admin- 
ister the  ordinary  rites  of  religion.3  The  dead,  from  the  same 
difficulty  of  transport,  were  commonly  buried  in  unconsecrated 
ground.4  The  stipend  of  the  clergy  was  paid  in  tobacco,  and  the 
fluctuations  in  the  value  of  that  commodity  gave  rise  to  more 
than  one  dispute,  and  was  a  constant  source  of  ill-feeling  between 
the  clergy  and  the  laity.5  Moreover,  though  Berkeley's  instruc- 
tions after  the  Restoration  had  ordered  an  endowment  for  the 
clergy,  no  provision  seems  to  have  been  made  for  legally  en- 
forcing the  payment  of  the  stipend.  Thus  the  order  remained  a 
dead  letter,  and  the  clergy  were  in  common  phrase  "  hired  "  by 
the  vestries.6  An  arrangement  which  gave  nothing  but  a  preca- 
rious livelihood,  dependent  on  the  good-will  of  a  congregation, 
was  little  likely  to  tempt  men  of  ability  and  character  to  face  the 
hardships  of  colonial  life. 

Nicholson's  antecedents  and  character  were  hardly  those  which 
we  should  associate  with  an  earnest  advocate  of  religion.  But  in 
the  age  of  Lawrence  Hyde  and  John  Churchill  sound  church 
principles  did  not  necessarily  involve  a  high  standard  of  private 
or  public  morality.  Nicholson,  too,  was  shrewd  enough  to  ap- 
preciate the  political  and  social  advantages  of  a  church  establish- 
ment, and  the  power  which  it  would  have  in  binding  the  colony 
to  the  mother  country. 

Any  want  of  genuine  religious  zeal  in  the  Lieutenant-Governor 
was  fully  made  up  for  by  his  chief  colleague.  James  Blair  might 
James  be  not  maPtly  described  as  a  colonial  Burnet.     In  each 

Biair.  0f  tiiem  an  Anglican  training  had  left  unimpaired  the 

1  Rachel  and  Leah,  pp.  9,  20. 

2  Berkeley's  report  in  Hening,  vol.  ii.  p.  517. 

3  This  is  stated  in  a  letter  addressed  by  Morgan  Godwyn,  a  clergyman  who  had  heldprefer- 
ment  both  in  Virginia  and  Barbadoes,  to  Sir  William  Berkeley.  The  letter  is  appended  tc 
Godwyn's  Negroes'  A  dvocate,  of  which  I  shall  have  occasion  to  speak  again,  p.  172  (ed.  1680). 
Cf.  Virginia's  Cure,  p.  4. 

4  Hugh  Jones's  Account  of  Virginia,  1727,  p.  67. 

6  This  is  set  forth  in  a  memorial  presented  by  the  Virginian  clergy  to  Sir  Edmund  Andros 
in  1696,  quoted  by  Anderson,  vol.  iii.  p.  389.     Cf.  Wirt's  Life  of  Patrick  Henry. 
6  Blair's  True  Account,  p.  65.     Godwyn,  p.  168.     Beverley,  p.  229. 


270 


VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORA  TION. 


energy  and  strong  will  of  the  Scotchman.  Neither  of  the  men 
possessed  much  of  that  discretion  and  sobriety  which  is  among 
the  chief  characteristics  of  their  race.  Indeed,  it  is  pretty  clear 
that  Blair's  hot  temper  and  unbridled  tongue  often  made  him  a 
troublesome  ally,  and  more  than  once  hindered  and  discredited 
his  great  work  in  Virginia.  In  his  own  day  he  achieved  consid- 
erable literary  reputation  by  sermons,  whose  sober  yet  flowing 
style  and  restrained  rationalism,  clearly  show  the  influence  of  Til- 
lotson.  But  the  pupil  could  hardly  expect  that  immortality 
which  has  been  denied  to  the  master,  and  we  have  only  to  deal 
with  Blair,  in  his  colonial  career,  as  the  strenuous  and  successful 
advocate  of  religion  and  education.  In  1685,  after  a  career  of 
ten  years  as  a  London  preacher,  Blair  went  out  to  Virginia,  with 
no  formal  authority,  but,  it  is  said,  under  the  advice  and  support 
of  Bishop  Compton.  After  the  revolution,  simultaneously  with 
Nicholson's  appointment  as  Deputy-Governor,  Blair  was  nom- 
inated Commissary  for  Virginia  by  the  Bishop  of  London. 

The  duties  of  the  Commissary  were  to  inspect  and  report  upon 
the  Virginian  church,  and  to  administer  discipline.  Blair  at  once 
began  his  labors  by  a  proclamation  against  immorality,  and  by 
making  arrangements  for  meetings  of  the  clergy.1  We  may  well 
believe,  too,  that  his  influence  was  the  cause  of  an  Act  passed  in 
1696,  fixing  the  stipend  of  the  clergy,  and  providing  glebes  and 
parsonage  houses  in  every  parish.2  It  is  clear  from  what  we  read 
of  the  state  of  the  Virginian  clergy  in  the  next  generation  that 
this  measure  was  but  partly  successful,  and  that  many  of  them 
were  still  left  dependent  on  the  precarious  good-will  of  their  scat- 
tered congregations.3 

Blair's  labors  on  behalf  of  education  were  more  successful,  and 
have  left  more  abiding  traces  in  the  records  of  the  colony.  In 
1690  we  find  him,  together  with  four  other  of  the  chief  clergy  in 
the  colony,  petitioning  the  merchants  of  London  to  assist  in  the 
foundation  of  a  college  in  Virginia.4  His  application  met  with  a 
liberal  response,  and  two  thousand  five  hundred  pounds  was 
contributed.5  This  fund  was  increased  by  the  liberality  of  Nich- 
olson, who  handed  over  three  hundred  pounds,  voted  to  him  by 

1  In  the  Colonial  Papers  for  1690. 

2  Hening,  vol.  iii.  p.  151. 
8  Jones  (quoted  above). 

4  Colonial  Papers,  July  25,  1690. 

»  A  memorial  from  the  Assembly  to  the  home  government  in  1692  states  this  sum  at  two 
thousand  pounds.     Beverley  says  two  thousand  five  hundred. 


SCHEMES  FOR  A   COLLEGE. 


-7 


the  Virginia  Assembly  under  the  special  and  exceptional  permis- 
sion of  the  crown.1 

In  1 69 1  Blair  went  to  England  as  the  authorized  representa- 
tive of  the  Assembly,  to  petition  for  the  establishment  of  a  col- 
proposais  lege.  The  subjects  to  be  taught  were  expressly  set 
conege.  forth  in  his  petition.2  They  were  to  be  Greek,  Latin, 
Hebrew,  Philosophy,  Mathematics,  and  Divinity.  In  order  that 
the  college  might  not  be  without  an  advocate  at  court,  the  As- 
sembly proposed  that  a  Chancellor  should  be  elected,  resident  in 
England,  to  hold  office  for  seven  years.3 

The  only  opposition  to  the  proposal  was  on  financial  grounds, 
and  the  discussion  which  ensued  raised  questions  of  no  small 
importance  as  to  the  relations  between  the  colony  and  the  mother 
country.  The  memorial  laid  before  the  crown  on  behalf  of  the 
Assembly  proposed  that  a  fund  of  about  two  thousand  pounds, 
consisting  of  accumulated  quit-rents,  should  be  appropriated  to 
the  college.  The  objection  that  these  quit-rents  are  needed  for 
purposes  of  defense  is  met  by  anticipation  with  the  argument 
that  the  Governor  and  Council  have  power  to  levy  a  special  rate 
for  military  objects.  At  the  same  time  the  memorialists  some- 
what indiscreetly  avow  their  wish  that  the  crown  and  Governor 
may  not  be  enabled  to  dispense  with  Assemblies,  which  they 
"  hold  as  necessary  for  their  liberties  as  Parliaments  for  the  peo- 
ple of  England." 

This  memorial  was  submitted  to  a  small  committee  consisting 
of  Godolphin,  Hampden,  and  Montague.4  As  we  have  it  at 
present,  it  is  accompanied  by  two  sets  of  marginal  comments, 
one  of  which  was  probably  the  work  of  the  three  Whig  states- 
men, while  the  other  seems  to  have  proceeded  from  some  one 
more  intimately  connected  with  colonial  administration  and  more 
familiar  with  its  details.  The  former  approves  of  the  college,  but 
questions  whether  the  crown  can  afford  the  endowment.  The 
latter,  while  not  actually  opposing  the  college,  makes  light  of  the 

1  The  leave  of  the  crown  to  make  the  gift  is  specially  asked  in  a  memorial  from  the  Assem- 
bly, October,  1691.  Beverley  (p.  88)  states  that  Nicholson  gave  half  of  it  to  the  college. 
Blair,  on  the  other  hand,  states  that  Nicholson  gave  three  hundred  and  fifty  pounds.— True 
Account,  p.  67. 

2  Blair's  instructions  from  the  Assembly  are  given  in  the  Colonial  Papers. 

3  This  is  not  mentioned  in  the  instructions,  but  in  a  later  memorial  from  the  Assembly. 

4  The  memorial,  and  the  two  sets  of  comments  on  it,  are  all  to  be  found  in  the  Colonial  Pa- 
pers. Unfortunately,  they  are  all  copied  in  a  hand  not  otherwise  known,  and  their  author- 
ship can  only  be  a  matter  of  conjecture.  But  it  is  expressly  stated  that  the  memorial  was 
submitted  to  the  three  statesmen  named. 


272  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

need  for  it.  The  line  taken  as  "to  the  financial  relations  between 
the  crown  and  the  colony  faintly  foreshadows  the  disputes  of  the 
next  century.  The  king  and  his  advisers,  says  the  writer,  can 
better  judge  of  the  necessities  of  taxation  than  the  colonists.  If 
the  crown  is  to  enjoy  a  proper  amount  of  influence  in  the  colony, 
it  must  not  be  wholly  dependent  on  the  good-will  of  the  Assem- 
bly for  its  revenue.  If  the  accumulated  fund  can  really  be  spared, 
it  would  be  better  employed,  he  suggests,  in  buying  up  those 
quit-rents  which  were  in  the  possession  of  Culpepper. 

At  the  same  time  the  question  of  taxation  was  raised  in  a  dif- 
ferent form.  Blair  was  accompanied  to  England  by  one  Jeoffry 
Jeoffry,1  who  was  sent  home  as  an  agent  by  the  Assembly  to  pe- 
tition for  a  charter,  and  more  especially  for  a  formal  declaration 
that  no  tax  should  be  levied  save  by  consent  of  the  Assembly. 
That  right  had  already  been  implicitly  acknowledged  in  How- 
ard's instructions,  and  we  may  doubt  the  wisdom  of  the  colonists 
in  thus  challenging  a  contest  on  the  point.  Of  the  details  of 
Jeoffry's  mission  we  know  nothing,  save  that  it  bore  no  fruit,  and 
that  the  whole  question  of  taxation  was  suffered  to  remain  in  the 
undefined  region  of  precedent. 

The  application  for  the  college  fared  better.  The  king  disre- 
garded the  cautions  of  those  who  wished  to  retain  the  accumu- 
lated funds,  and  in  1692  the  college  was  formally  incorporated  by 
charter.  The  endowment  was  formed  by  the  voluntary  subscrip- 
tions already  mentioned,  and  by  the  gift  of  the  accumulated  quit- 
rents.  A  yearly  income  was  provided  by  a  grant  of  twenty 
.thousand  acres,  of  a  duty  of  one  penny  on  every  pound  of  to- 
bacco exported  from  Virginia  or  Maryland,  and  the  right  of 
farming  the  chief  surveyor's  place,  a  right  valued  at  fifty  pounds 
a  year.  The  Assembly  over  and  above  granted  a  hundred  pounds 
a  year  by  a  duty  on  skins  and  furs.2 

The  satisfaction  of  the  colonists  at  the  foundation  of  the  col- 
lege was  damped  by  an  event  which  immediately  followed.  In 
sir  1694  the  death  of  Lord  Howard  left  the  governorship 

Edmund  *  .  °  .  r 

Andros  vacant.  Nicholson  s  services  might  well  seem  to  give 
Governor,  him  a  paramount  claim  to  the  vacant  place.  The  king, 
however,  conferred  it  on  Sir  Edmund  Andros,  a  worthless  place- 
man, who  had  shared  with  Nicholson  the  odium  which  sur- 
rounded the  last  Stuart  reign,  but  had  no  such  services  to  set  off 

1  Jeoffry's  instructions  are  given  in  the  Colonial  Papers,  following  Blair's. 

2  A  True  A  ccouut,  p.  66. 


THE  COLLEGE  ESTABLISHED.  273 

against  his  early  misdeeds.  The  dissatisfaction  which  Nicholson 
justly  felt  at  being  thus  passed  over  was  increased  by  some  pre- 
vious quarrel  with  Andros.  So  bitterly  was  this  appointment  re- 
sented by  the  people  of  Virginia  that  it  was  deemed  unsafe  to 
retain  Nicholson  in  office  lest  his  popularity  should  cause  a  fac- 
tion against  the  Governor.  At  the  same  time  Blair,  from  whose 
letters  our  knowledge  of  this  affair  is  chiefly  derived,  testifies  that 
no  suspicion  of  disloyalty  could  justly  attach  to  Nicholson.1 
The  Lieutenant-Governor  was  consoled  by  the  governorship  of 
Maryland.  Andros  only  held  office  for  two  years,  and  in  1696 
Nicholson  returned  to  Virginia  as  Governor.  One  of  his  first 
acts  was  to  transfer  the  capital  to  a  new  site.  The  place  chosen 
was  some  ten  miles  north  of  Jamestown,  about  equidistant  be- 
tween the  York  and  James  Rivers,  and  thus  enjoyed  more  imme- 
diate communication  with  the  northern  parts  of  the  colony.  The 
name  of  Williamsburg  was  bestowed  in  honor  of  the  king,  and 
with  a  fantastic  pomposity  savoring  of  the  time,  the  ground  plan 
of  the  new  city  was  laid  out  in  the  shape  of  a  W.  The  attrac- 
tions of  Williamsburg  did  not  wean  the  planters  from  their  coun- 
try life,  and,  like  its  predecessor,  the  new  city  was  but  the  seat 
of  government,  and  neither  for  social  nor  mercantile  purposes 
the  capital  of  the  colony. 

Meanwhile  the  college  was  advancing,  and  before  Nicholson's 
term  of  office  had  come  to  an  end  two  sides  of  the  quadrangle 
Foundation  which  the  building  was  designed  to  form  were  com- 
of  thlist°ry  pleted-  A  few  years  later,  however,  a  fire  undid  all 
college.  that  had  been  accomplished,  and  when  Beverley  wrote, 
in  1720,  though  the  damaged  buildings  had  been  restored,  no 
further  progress  had  been  made.2 

The  charter  of  the  college  placed  it  under  the  governorship  of 
a  body  of  trustees,  who  were  to  nominate  a  President  and  six, 
afterwards  raised  to  ten,  Fellows.  The  former  was  to  receive  a 
hundred  and  fifty  pounds  a  year,  the  latter  eighty  pounds  each. 
The  students  were  to  be  a  hundred  in  number.  They  seem  to 
have  been  only  in  the  position  of  commoners  at  an  English  col- 
lege, and  to  have  received  no  benefaction,  nor  did  the  charter 
give  any  power  of  conferring  degrees.  The  first  President  was 
Blair,  who  remained  in  office  for  nearly  fifty  years.3 

1  All  this  is  stated  in  a  letter  from  Blair  to  Blathwayt,  written  from  Portsmouth,  May  29, 
1693.  2  Beverley,  p.  232. 

8  The  charter  is  given  as  an  appendix  to  the  True  Relation. 

l8 


2 74  VIRGINIA  AFTER  THE  RESTORATION. 

By  1700  the  academic  life  of  the  place  was  sufficiently  estab- 
lished to  enable  the  authorities  to  hold  a  solemn  commencement, 
for  the  delivery  of  prize  compositions  and  exercises.  Tradition 
tells  us  that  the  novel  spectacle  brought  visitors  not  only  from 
the  neighboring  colony  of  Maryland,  but  even  from  New  York, 
and  that  the  very  savages  visited  Williamsburg  for  the  pageant.1 
The  dreams  of  Raleigh  and  Gilbert  might  seem  fulfilled  when  the 
countrymen  of  Manteo  looked  on  at  ceremonies  transplanted 
from  the  banks  of  Cam  and  Isis. 

Yet  we  may  well  doubt  whether  the  college  did  much  for  the 
colony.  About  thirty  years  later  one  of  its  own  Fellows  pithily 
described  it  as  "a  college  without  a  chapel,  without  a  scholar- 
ship, and  without  a  statute,  a  library  without  books,  a  President 
without  a  fixed  salary,  and  a  Burgess  without  electors."  2  It  is 
evident,  too,  from  other  accounts,  that  it  was  nothing  better  than 
a  boarding-school,  in  which  Blair  had  no  small  difficulty  in  con- 
tending against  the  extravagance  and  license  engendered  by  the 
home-training  of  his  pupils.3  There  was  no  lack  of  mental  culture 
in  Virginia.  While  the  accomplished  and  highly  trained  country 
gentlemen  of  the  seventeenth  century,  the  Elliot  or  Hampden, 
had  gradually  degenerated  into  the  Sir  Roger  or  Squire  Western 
of  the  eighteenth,  the  Virginian  planter  had  risen  in  the  scale. 
But  the  young  colonist  was  either  taught  by  a  tutor  who  was  often 
also  the  domestic  chaplain  of  the  plantation,  or  was  sent  for  edu- 
cation either  to  one  of  the  northern  colonies  or  to  the  mother 
country.  The  College  of  William  and  Mary  had  but  a  small 
share  in  training  that  generation  of  Virginian  statesmen  who  left 
so  deep  an  impress  on  the  history  of  the  world. 

1  Campbell's  History  of  Virginia,  quoted  by  Mr.  Tyler,  History  0/ American  Literature, 
vol.  ii.  p.  261. 

2  Jones,  p.  83. 

3  There  is  a  curious  account  of  a  barring-out  row  given  in  a  pamphlet  called  a  Modest  A  n- 
swef  to  a  malicious  Libel  against  his  Excellency,  Francis  Nicholson.  Nicholson  had  been 
accused  of  abetting  the  rioters. 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE  FOUNDATION  OF  MARYLAND.1 

In  passing  from  the  history  of  Virginia  to  that  of  Maryland  we 
at  once  feel  that  our  subject  has  lost  interest,  alike  biographical 
Contrast  and  constitutional.  The  setting  sun  of  the  Elizabethan 
Virginia  age  seems  to  throw  back  its  last  beams  on  the  found- 
fand.  ary"   ers  of  Virginia.     Something  of  the  spirit  of  Hore  and 

1  The  chief  authorities  for  the  early  history  of  Maryland  are: — 

i.  A  pamphlet  published  in  Force's  collection,  vol.  iv.,  and  entitled  A  Relation  of  tke 
Colony  of  the  Lord  Baron  of  Baltimore.  This  is  a  report  sent  home  by  one  of  the  Jesuits 
who  accompanied  the  colony  and  copied  from  the  Archives  of  the  Jesuit  College  in  Rome. 
Force's  version  is  a  translation  from  the  original  Latin.  It  gives  a  vivid  and  somewhat  gar- 
rulous account  of  the  voyage,  the  early  life  of  the  settlement,  and  where  religion  does  not  come 
into  play,  it  is  a  valuable  authority. 
'  2.  A  manifesto  on  behalf  of  the  colony,  entitled  A  Relation  of  Maryland.     London,  1635. 

This  is  described  in  the  text. 

The  disputes  between  Maryland  and  Virginia  are  set  forth  in  a  number  of  party  pamphlets. 

The  Puritan  (/.  e.,  the  Virginian)  side  of  the  question  is  stated  in  a  pamphlet  entitled  Vir- 
ginia and  Maryland,  or  the  Lord  Baltimore's  Case  uncased  and  answered  :  1655.  Force, 
vol.  ii.  On  the  other  side,  we  have  Hammond's  Leah  and  Rachel  (Force,  vol.  hi.),  already 
referred  to,  and  another  printed  pamphlet  by  the  same  writer,  entitled  Hammond  v.  Heamotis. 
This  is  among  the  Colonial  Papers,  1655.  There  is  also  a  Puritan  pamphlet,  entitled  Baby- 
lon's Fall,  by  Leonard  Strong,  and  an  answer  to  it  by  one  Langford.  The  latter  is  in  the 
British  Museum.     I  have  been  unable  to  find  a  copy  of  the  former. 

Mr.  Bozman's  History  of  Maryland,  published  in  1837,  is  an  invaluable  magazine  of  in- 
formation as  to  the  early  constitutional  history  of  the  colony. 

The  work  is  diffuse,  but  contains  all  that  could  be  learned  on  the  subject.  Mr.  Bozman 
had  access  to  all  the  early  archives,  a.nd  has  often  incorporated  extracts  from  them  with  his 
work,  which  is  in  fact  as  much  a  calendar  of  documents  as  a  continuous  narrative.  Unfortu- 
nately the  author's  early  death  prevented  him  from  continuing  his  work  beyond  1658. 

As  was  natural  from  the  character  of  its  government,  Maryland  figures  far  less  prominently 
than  Virginia  in  our  own  Colonial  Papers. 

The  principal  collection  of  documents  specially  relating  to  this  colony  is  Bacon's  Laws  of 
Maryland.  This  contains  all  the  enactments  of  the  Assembly  still  extant.  Some  of  these 
are  given  in  full,  of  some  the  titles  only  are  published.  Fortunately,  those  of  chief  impor-r 
tance,  those,  namely,  which  relate  to  the  time  of  the  Commonwealth,  are  published  in  full,  and 
are  for  the  most  part  incorporated  with  Mr.  Bozman's  work. 

The  career  of  the  first  Lord  Baltimore  has  been  well  worked  out  by  Mr.  Kirke  in  his  Con- 
quest of  Canada  (1871). 

Mr.  Neill  has  collected  various  facts  relating  to  the  early  history  of  Maryland  in  a  work 

275 


276  THE  FO  UNDA  TION  OF  MA  R  YLA  ND. 

Gilbert  lingers  on  the  exploits  of  Smith  and  the  far-seeing  enter- 
prise of  Dale  and  Delaware.  If  we  measure  men  by  the  per- 
manence of  their  work  or  by  the  harmony  of  their  practices  with 
the  accepted  theories  of  later  ages,  the  founder  of  Maryland  de- 
serves a  high  place  in  history,  but  from  no  point  of  view  can  we 
find  much  that  is  striking  or  attractive  in  his  character.  The 
struggle  between  the  crown  and  the^Virginia  Company,  a  strug^ 
gle  which  no  Englishman  who  has  learnecTfO  value  constitutional 
freedom  can  look  upon  unmoved,  has  no  counterpart  in  the  case/ 
of  Maryland.  So,  too,  with  the  constitutional  history  of  the  two' 
colonies.  In  the  case  of  Virginia,  we  see  how  a  community  of 
Englishmen,  left  to  fashion  their  own  institutions,  wrought  out,  by 
a  process  of  half-conscious  imitation,  a  system  of  government 
modeled  on  that  of  the  mother  country.  The  constitutional  his- 
tory of  Maryland  repeats  the  same  process  on  a  smaller  scale, 
hindered  at  times  either  by  the  will  of  the  founder  or  by  disputes, 
springing  out  of  his  personal  rights  and  position.  J 

In  one  respect  the  colonization  of  Maryland  may  be  looked  on 
as  a  step  backward.     The  failures  of  Gilbert  and  Raleigh  had  ledH 
The  pro-      men  to  transfer  the  responsibilities  of  colonization  from  * 
principle,     individuals  to  a  corporation.      The  position  of  Lord 
Baltimore  as  the  proprietor  of  Maryland  was  a  return   to  the 
earlier  idea.     But  Gilbert  and  Raleigh  seem  to  have  felt  that  % 
they  were  acting  as  public  servants,  as  the  trustees  of  a  great  na- 
tional interest.     Their  attitude  was  in  some  sort  like  that  of  indi-  - 
vidual  citizens  in  the  ancient  republics  of  Greece,  when  wealth 
and  high  birth  carried  with  them  an  implied,  though  not  a  formal, 
obligation  to  undertake  great  public  duties.     Lord  Baltimore,  as 
far  as  we  can  see,  went  into  the  task  of  colonization  as  a  great  ■ 
English  landed  proprietor  of  the  better  sort  administers  his  es- 
tate, conscientiously  and  with  a  due  regard  to  the  welfare  of  the 
-persons  on  his  territory,  but  without  any  special  sense  of  respon- 
sibility towards  the  community.    The  position  of  Lord  Baltimore 
was  indeed  that  of  a  great  English  landholder  with  enlarged  pow- 
■  ers,  transferred  to  a  sphere  in  which  the  special  rights  and  powers 
iof  a  landlord  were  neither  indigenous  nor  congenial,  and  the  re- 
sult, as  may  be  supposed,  was  not  always  satisfactory. 

called  Terra  Maria.     The  most  valuable  part  of  this  book  lies  in  its  contributions  to  the  re- 
ligious and  social  history  of  the  colony  between  the  Restoration  and  the  Revolution. 

Mr.  Neill  has  also  devoted  two  chapters  of  his  English  Colonizatitm  to  Maryland,  but  he 
has  done  little  more  than  collect  and  epitomize  the  various  documents  in  the  State  Papers^ 
and  his  treatment  of  the  subject  is  marked  by  a  violent  bias  in  favor  of  Puritanism. 


SIR  GEORGE  CALVERT.  2^j 

The  history  of  Maryland  begins  with  Cecilius  Calvert,  the 
second  Lord  Baltimore.  But  the  position  and  character  of  his 
sir  George  father  had  their  influence  on  the  colony,  and  have  there- 
Caivert.  fore  a  ciauT1  on  our  attention.  George  Calvert  was 
among  the  lower  rank  of  those  men  who  in  the  reigns  of  Eliza- 
beth and  her  successor  rose  in  the  favor  of  the  crown  from  a 
moderate  station  to  eminence  and  wealth.  His  public  career  be- 
gan in  the  employment  of  Sir  Robert  Cecil.  Thence  he  was' 
promoted  to  the  clerkship  of  the  Privy  Council,  and  his  further 
progress  in  the  favor  of  James  I.  was  marked  by  his  knighthood 
in  1617,  and  by  his  promotion  to  one  of  the  Secretaryships  of 
State.  He  was,  according  to  common  belief,  among  the  foremost 
advocates  of  the  Spanish  marriage,  and  the  failure  of  that  scheme 
and  the  total  change  in  our  foreign  policy  which  followed,  shat- 
tered his  political  hopes  and  fortunes.  Calvert's  next  step,  his 
conversion  to  Romanism,  was  practically  an  acceptance  of~defeat, 
as  it  entailed  a  retirement  from  public  life.  Weak  and  unpatriotic 
as  was  the  policy  of  the  Spanish  party,  yet  it  was  the  act  of  an 
honest  and  conscientious  man  to  identify  himself  fully  with  a  cause 
at  the  very  moment  of  its  overthrow. 

Calvert's  career  as  a  colonist  began  with  his  retirement  from 
public  life  in  England.  Though  his  conversion  cost  him  his  place, 
His  at-  ne  did  not  forfeit  the  favor  of  his  master.  He  was 
coiomza3-1  cons°led  by  large  grants  of  land  in  Ireland,  and  by  the 
tion.i  title  of  Lord  Baltimore.     In  addition  to  these  he  re- 

ceived from  the  king  the  grant  of  a  territory  in  Newfoundland. 
The  form  of  the  grant  is  of  some  interest  as  foreshadowing  the 
constitution  of  Maryland,  and  as  being  the  first  of  Jhe  numerous 
proprietary  governments  createdVby  the  Stuarts.  It  gave  to  Cal- 
vert and  his  successors  full  legislative  power,  only  limited  by  the 
clause,  that"  their  enactments  must  be  as  near  as  conveniently 
might  be  to  the  laws  and  customs  of  England,  and  that  they  must 
not  interfere  with  private  property  nor  be  contrary  to  reason. 
The  demand  for  public  representation  was  contemplated  and  re- 
fused on  the  ground  that  many  "  sudden  accidents  "'  might  arise 
requiring  immediate  legislation.  In  short,  the  sovereignty  of  the 
proprietor  was  slightly  and  imperfectly  limited  as  against  the 
crown,  unlimited  as  against  his  subjects. 

1  1  have  taken  all  the  details  concerning  Sir  George  Calvert  from  Kirke  and  Bozman,  com- 
paring them  with  the  authorities  to  which  they  refer.  His  patent  for  Newfoundland  is  in  the 
Colonial  Papers,  1623,  April  7.     His  letters  thence  are  in  the  same  collection. 


278 


THE  FOUNDATION  OF  MARYLAND. 


The  climate  of  Newfoundland,  however,  was  a  more  practical 
hinderance  to  Baltimore's  success  than  any  constitutional  difficul- 
ties. At  first  all  seemed  to  prosper.  In  1623  a  small  settlement 
was  founded,  and  in  two  years'  time  it  achieved  such  rapid  pros- 
perity, that  Baltimore  himself  went  out  with  his  family  to  establish 
himself  as  the  resident  ruler  of  his  little  principality.  His  hopes 
were  soon  dashed  and  troubles  came  fast.  French  privateers  fol- 
lowed the  example  of  Argall,  and  would  fain  have  dealt  with  Bal- 
timore as  his  countrymen  had  dealt  with  Poutrincourt  and  the 
Jesuits.  The  assailants,  however,  only  succeeded  in  capturing 
two  fishing  vessels.  Baltimore  fortunately  had  two  ships  of  war 
with  twenty-four  guns,  with  which  he  attacked  and  routed  the 
would-be  invaders.  But  no  sooner  had  he  disposed  of  the  ene- 
mies of  his  country  than  he  was  beset  by  the  enemies  of  his  re- 
ligion. Already  a  few  scattered  communities  of  Puritans,  en- 
couraged, it  may  be,  by  the  success  of  the  Plymouth  colony,  had 
established  themselves  in  Newfoundland.  In  1627  a  leading 
Puritan  divine,  Erasmus  Stourton,  came  back  from  Newfoundland 
with  a  tale  of  Baltimore's  enormities.  Not  only  was  he  accom- 
panied by  three  priests  who  said  mass  every  Sunday,  but  a  Pres- 
byterian had  been  forced  to  submit  his  child  to  Popish  baptism. 
To  a  mere  worldly  politician  it  might  have  seemed  desirable  to 
have  a  peaceful  refuge  across  the  Atlantic,  where  Papists  might 
celebrate  their  own  rites  in  quiet,  instead  of  hatching  Gunpowder 
Plots  and  fostering  Irish  rebellions  at  home.  But  with  the  Pu- 
ritan of  the  seventeenth  century,  as  with  the  Papist,  persecution 
was  not  a  question  of  political  expediency,  but  a  direct  mode  of 
rescuing  souls  from  the  evil  one.  Stourton's  grievances  were 
brought  before  the  Privy  Council.  Whether  that  body  would 
have  cared  to  help  a  Nonconformist  in  annoying  a  moderate  and 
inoffensive  Papist,  who  stood  high  in  the  favor  of  the  court,  is  at 
least  doubtful.  The  question,  however,  was  not  tried.  Baltimore 
soon  found  that  the  accounts  of  the  soil  and  climate  which  his 
agents  had  sent  him  were  over-colored.  In  T629  we  find  him 
writing  home  a  pitiful  letter  to  the  king,  telling  of  the  troubles 
which  had  befallen  himself  and  his  followers.  From  September 
to  May  sea  and  land  alike  were  bound  in  an  almost  uninterrupted 
frost,  and  out  of  a  hundred  settlers  half  had  been  sick  and  ten  had 
died.  Nevertheless  Baltimore  did  not  give  up  his  scheme  for 
colonization.  The  frosts  of  Newfoundland,  and  the  fanaticism  of 
its  Puritan  occupants,  had  baffled  him ;  he  might  fare  better  in  the 


HIS  DISPUTE  WITH  THE  VIRGINIANS.  279 

genial  climate  and  among  the  moderate  Churchmen  of  Virginia. 
Accordingly  he,  and,  as  it  would  seem,  his  whole  colony,  emi- 
grated, and  sought  to  establish  an  independent  plantation  on  the 
territory  of  the  Virginia  Company.  It  is  probable  that  Baltimore's 
whole  retinue  was  little,  if  at  all,  larger  than  that  of  some  of  the 
great  Virginian  planters.  But  his  antecedents,  his  religion,  his 
favor  with  the  court,  and  his  previous  attempts  to  establish  a  col- 
ony of  which  he  should  be  the  almost  independent  ruler,  might 
well  make  the  Virginians  view  him  with  -disfavor.  The  moderate 
Anglican  and  constitutional  party,  who  had  been  the  backbone  of 
the  Virginia  Company,  were  almost  as  intolerantly  hostile  to  Pa- 
pists as  were  the  Nonconformists  themselves,  and  the  so-called 
Cavalier  Colony  seems  to  have  been  imbued  with  the  spirit  of  its 
founders  alike  in  its  religious  and  political  feelings.  Accordingly 
Baltimore  found  himself  at  once  met  with  a  demand  that  he  should 
take  the  oaths  of  supremacy  and  allegiance. 

This  procedure  is  set  forth  in  a  memorial  addressed  to  the  king, 
and  signed  by  Pott,  then  temporarily  Governor,  and  by  Clayborne, 
Baltimore's  Mathews,  and  West,  all  leading  members  of  the  pop- 
witi^the  u^ar  Partv-  Their  hostility  to  Baltimore  is  shown  by 
Virginians,  the  statement  that  he  "utterly"  refused  to  take  the 
oaths,  while  they  themselves  inclose  a  modified  form  of  subscrip- 
tion, no  longer  extant,  which  he  himself  proposed.  The  claim  of 
the  Assembly  to  administer  this  oath  was  based  on  the  instructions 
of  King  James.  This,  beyond  doubt,  refers  to  a  clause  in  the 
third  charter  of  the  Virginia  Company,  by  which  the  President 
and  Council,  or  any  two  of  them,  should  have  power  to  admin- 
ister these  oaths  to  all  settlers.  It  was  certainly  a  singular  inter- 
pretation which  extended  this  authority  to  any  power  extant  in 
Virginia  after  the  dissolution  of  the  Company. 

The  two  tests  required  from  Baltimore  differed  somewhat  in 
their  nature  and  object.  The  oath  of  supremacy  required  by 
statute  in  the  first  year  of  Elizabeth,_was  moretnan  a  mere  check 
on  the  treasonable  designs  of  Papists.  It  was  fitted  and  in  all 
probability  designed  to  drive  all  conscientious  Papists  out  of  the 
kingdom,  since  it  compelled  them  to  abjure  the  spiritual  and 
ecclesiastical  sovereignty  of  the  Pope  within  Great  Britain.  It 
was  an  oath  to  be  administered  by  officers  especially  appointed 
by  the  crown  for  that  purpose,  at  such  times  and  to  such  persons 
as  they  should  think  fit.  It  was,  in  short,  a  formidable  and 
exceptional  weapon,  entrusted  to  the  sovereign  for  his  own  de- 


2  80  THE  FO  UN  DA  TION  OF  MA  R  YLA  ND. 

fense,  and  not  intended  to  be  put  in  force  against  peaceable 
citizens.  %  The  oath  of  allegiance  was  less  exacting  in  its  charac- 
ter, but  more  widespread  in  its  operation.  It  simply  required  the 
taker  to  renounce  the  temporal  sovereignty  of  the  Pope  within 
the  realm  of  England.  This  oath  might  be  administered  at  any 
time  by  two  magistrates  to  any  person  below  the  rank  of  a  peer. 
Baltimore  therefore  was  himself  exempted  by  the  very  words  of 
the  statute.  This  exemption  did  not  extend  to  his  followers. 
Yet  it  is  hard  to  see  by  what  legal  title  the  Virginian  Assembly 
could  claim  the  powers  of  an  English  magistrate.  Even  if  we 
grant  that  the  emergency  justified  such  latitude,  assuredly  the 
Virginians  weakened  their  case  by  the  grounds  on  which  they 
based  it.  However  the  matter  might  be,  it  was  at  least  certain 
that  no  power  could  be  conferred  on  the  Assembly  by  a  clause 
in  an  instrument  which  never  even  contemplated  the  existence 
of  such  a  body.1 

The  expediency  of  these  dealings  with  Lord  Baltimore  is  a 
more  important  question  than  their  lawfulness.  If  he  had  been 
a  'man  of  ordinary  temper,  if  he  had  not  been  succeeded  by  a 
son  who  combined  the  same  passion  for  colonization  with  a  far 
greater  amount  of  energy  and  pugnacity,  it  is  possible  that  the 
policy  of  Virginia  would  have  attained  its  object,  and  the  settle- 
ment of  Maryland  have  never  come  into  being.  Baltimore, 
however,  seems  to  have  combined  a  peaceable  and  not  very 
energetic  temper  with  a  large  share  of  quiet  perseverance.  He 
allowed  himself  to  be  hunted  out  of  Virginia  by  the  hostility  of 
the  Assembly  as  he  had  been  hunted  out  of  Newfoundland  by 
the  united  influence  of  the  climate  and  of  the  Puritans.  But  in- 
stead of  abandoning  his  scheme,  he  returned  to  it  in  a  form  which, 
whether  by  design  or  not,  amply  avenged  on  the  Virginians  the 
wrong  they  had  done  him.  In  April,  1632,  he  received  from  the 
crown  a  grant  of  land  lying  to  the  north  of  that  actually  settled 
by  the  Virginia  Company,  but  overlapping  by  more  than  a  hun- 
dred miles  the  territory  formally  included  in  the  original  Virginia 
patent.2 

If,  as  we  may  well  believe,  this  grant  was  due  to  Baltimore's  favor 
with  the  crown,  a  delay  of  a  few  weeks  might  have  prevented  the 
colony  of  Maryland  from  ever  coming  into  existence.      In  April, 

1  These  proceedings  are  described  in  a  memorial  from  some  of  the  leading  Virginians.  Co- 
lonial Papers,  1629,  November  30. 

?  The  grant  and  charter  are  published  at  the  beginning  of  Mr.  Bozman's  second  volume. 


C EC  I  LI  US  CALVERT.  281 

1632,  Lord  Baltimore  died,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Cecil- 
ius  Calvert.  That  he  was  a  far  more  energetic  and  practical  man 
The  grant  than  his  father  is  clear  enough,  but  beyond  that  his 
°an^.ary"  character  is  a  riddle.  His  is  one  of  those  not  uncommon 
cases  where  a  wise  policy  may  have  been  adopted  without  any 
specially  wise  motives,  and  where  cautious  moderation  may  have 
assumed  the  guise  of  noble  self-denial.  Cecilius  Calvert  had  to 
deal  with  astute  and  unscrupulous  enemies ;  in  his  struggle  with 
them  he  resorted  to  no  unfair  means,  he  never  was  betrayed  into 
an  act  of  rashness,  and  his  policy  of  moderation  and  apparent 
self-restraint  served  him  better  than  the  best  concerted  scheme  of 
opposition.  Above  all,  he  was  tolerant  in  an  age  of  almost  uni- 
versal intolerafic~er  All  this  is  high  praise.  Yet  a  man  may  be 
below  the  temptation  to  persecute  rather  than  above  it,  and  a 
cynical  indifference  to  lofty  ends  may  save  him  from  the  errors 
of„.nobler  men.  There  is  nothing  to  show  that  Baltimore  stood 
high  in  the  opinion  of  those  who  would  naturally  have  sympa- 
thized with  his  aims  and  actions.  There  are  slight  yet  significant 
events  which  throw  discredit  on  his  motives.  Which  view  of  his 
character  is  the  correct  one  will  be  best  seen  as  his  career  un- 
folds itself. 

The  Maryland  charter  is  full  of  interest  as  being  the  first  pro- 
prietary constitution  that  bore  any  actual  fruit.  It  conferred  on 
character  the  grantee  probably  the  most  extensive  political  privi- 
charter.  leges  ever  enjoyed  by  an  English  subject,  since  the 
great  houses  had  bowed  before  the  successive  oppression  of 
Yorkist  and  Tudor  rule.  It  may  be  looked  at  from  two  points  of 
view  ;  it  established  certain  relations  between  the  Proprietor  and 
the  English  crown,  and  others  between  the  Proprietor  and  those 
whom  we  must  call  his  subjects.  As  to  the  first,  it  made  Balti- 
more in  his  proprietary  character  almost  independent  of  the 
crown.  The  only  limitation  to  this  was  a  clause,  requiring  that 
all  churches  and  places  of  worship  in  Maryland  should  be  dedi- 
cated and  consecrated  according  to  the  ecclesiastical  laws  of  the 
Church  of  England.  It  cannot  be  supposed  that  this  was  in- 
tended to  interfere  with  the  free  exercise  of  the  Romish  religion, 
but  merely  to  prevent  it  from  asserting  a  claim  to  be  an  established 
religion  on  an  equal  footing  with  the  Church  of  England  in  the 
colony.  That  Baltimore  should  have  accepted  this  clause  is 
significant,  as  it  quite  dispels  the  idea  that  he  intended  his  colony; 
as  a  special  refuge  for  his  own  sect,  a  stronghold  for  persecuted \ 


282  THE  FOUND  A  TION  OF  MARYLAND. 

Romanism.  In  all  other  respects  the  Proprietor  was  absolved 
from  all  reference  to  the  crown.  No  doubt  there  was  an  implied 
condition  that  his  proceedings  should  be  in  accordance  with  the 
interests  of  the  mother  country,  and  should  not  in  any  way  vio- 
late public  policy,  and  no  doubt  any  such  violation  might  have 
formed  a  ground  for  special  interference.  But  there  is  a  wide 
difference  between  such  special  appeal  and  the  constant  necessity 
for  submitting  all  legislation  for  the  approval  of  the  crown,  as  in 
the  case  of  Virginia. 

As  towards  his  subjects  the  position  of  the  Proprietor  was  very 
vaguely  defined.'  He  was  instructed  to  make  laws  with  the  ad- 
vice, assent,  and  approbation  of  the  freemen  or  of  the  greater 
part  of  them,  or  their  representatives.  But  what  constituted  a 
freeman,  by  what  process  or  on  what  system  his  representative 
was  to  be  selected,  what,  in  short,  was  to  be  the  machinery  by 
which  the  rights  of  the  commonalty  were  to  be  secured,  all  this 
was  left  to  the  Proprietor  himself.  Furthermore,  it  was  specially 
provided  that  in  cases  where  the  emergencies  of  the  colony  ren- 
dered it  inconvenient  to  summon  a  representative  body,  the 
Proprietor  should  have  power,  to  makfi-ordinances  which  should 
have  the  force  of  laws.  At  the  same  time  this  clause  was  de- 
prived of  all  danger,  and  one  would  have  supposed  of  all  force, 
by  the  provision  that  such  ordinances  were  not  to  affect  any  man 
in  his  life  or  goods. 

One  main  point  in  the  charter  deserves  notice,  not  for  its  im- 
mediate, but  for  its  distant  importance.  It  was  specially  pro- 
vided that  no  tax  should  be  levied  by  the  crown  on  any  person 
in  the  colony  or  on  any  goods  within  the  colony.  The  clause 
itself  was  declared  to  carry  with  it  the  full  force  of  a  discharge  in 
case  any  attempt  should  be  made  by  judicial  proceedings  to  en- 
force such  an  impost,  and  with  a  somewhat  rash  zeal  for  finality, 
the  displeasure  of  the  crown  was  denounced  against  those  who 
should  at  any  future  time  disregard  this  mandate. 

This  grant  was  not  suffered  to  pass  without  opposition.  The 
old  members  of  the  Virginia  Company  who  had  not  yet  aban- 
Opposition  doned  all  hopes  of  recovering  their  chartered  rights, 
grant!  and  also  the  actual  settlers  in  Virginia,  lodged  protests 

before  the  Privy  Council.  The  former  of  these  documents  is  still 
extant,  and  serves  well  enough  to  show  the  general  grounds  on 
which  those  interested  in  Virginia  were  hostile  to  the  new  colony.1 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1632,  June. 


THE  FIRST  SE  TTLEMENT.  2  83 

In  the  first  place,  Baltimore's  patent  was  a  distinct  intrusion  on 
their  territorial  limits.  The  memorialists  then  point  out  the  dan- 
gers of  the  unlimited  power  of  taxation  and  legislation  conferred 
on  Baltimore.  Lastly,  they  dwell  on  a  point  of  great  importance, 
and  one  that  is  a  key  to  much  which  otherwise  might  seem  inex- 
plicable in  colonial  politics,  the  difficulties,  namely,  in  which  the 
settlers  might  be  involved  by  the  policy  of  an  independent  neigh- 
bor. The  Marylanders  might  sell  arms  to  the  Indians,  or  if  they 
took  land  without  payment,  or  otherwise  ill-treated  their  savage 
neighbors,  their  misdeeds  would  be  set  down  without  discrimina- 
tion to  the  account  of  the  whole  white  race. 

There  is  no  trace  of  the  precise  nature  of  the  complaint  made 
by  the  Virginian  planters.  Neither  remonstrance,  however,  pro- 
duced any  effect.  The  Privy  Council  ordered  a  conference  be- 
tween the  parties,  of  which  we  have  no  particulars.  It  then  en- 
joined them  to  keep  the  peace  towards  one  another,  and  to  trade 
.together  amicably ;  and  in  conclusion,  told  the  aggrieved  parties 
to  seek  a  remedy  by  process  of  law.  At  the  same  time  a  general 
injunction  was  sent'by  the  crown  to  the  Virginian  colonists,  or- 
dering them  to  befriend  Baltimore  and  his  followers.  The  result 
of  this  injunction  has  been  already  seen.1 

Baltimore  himself  did  not  accompany  his  colonists.  In  his 
stead  he  sent  his  younger  brother,  Leonard  Calvert.  The  party 
The  first  was  embarked  in  two  ships,  and  numbered  some  three 
mente.2  hundred,  the  greater  part  of  them  handicraftsmen  and 
husbandmen.3  Baltimore  does  not  seem  to  have  been  reduced, 
like  almost  every  colonizer  who  had  gone  before  him,  to  stock 
his  community  with  the  scum  and  offscouring  of  the  old  country. 
In  this  respect  we  cannot  doubt  that  he  gained  by  following  in 
the  footsteps  of  the  Virginia  Company,  and,  in  a  less  degree,  of 
the  New  England  Puritans.  These  examples  had  already  shown 
that  an  American  colony  might  be  something  better  than  a  refuge 
for  the  helpless  and  destitute,  that  it  might  be  a  place  where  en- 
ergetic men  could  reproduce  in  a  rough  form  the  varied  enjoy- 
ments and  activities  of  the  mother  country. 

Whether  the  majority  of  the  colonists  were  Papists  or  Protest- 
ants is  a  point  on  which  we  cannot  get  beyond  inference.  There 
its  reiig-  is,  however,  distinct  evidence  that  there  were  numbers 
iou^char-    of  both  creeds  among  them.     That  the  co-religionists 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1633,  Julys  and  12.    . 

2  In  the  account  of  the  voyage  and  first  settlement  I  have  followed  White. 

8  A  letter  from  Baltimore  to  Strafford,  quoted  by  Mr.  Neill  (English  Colonization,  p.  239). 


284  THE  F0  UN  DA  TION  OF  MA  R  YLA  ND. 

of  the  Proprietor  were  in  a  majority  is  at  least  probable  from  the 
fact  that  the  expedition  was  accompanied  by  two  Jesuit  mission- 
aries. To  one  of  them,  Father  Andrew  White,  we  owe  a  pictur- 
esque, though  not  always  trustworthy,  account  of  the  voyage  and 
of  the  early  days  of  the  settlement.  It  would  have  been  very 
unlike  the  caution  and  worldly  wisdom  of  Baltimore  to  risk  the 
collision  which  must  almost  inevitably  have  followed,  if  a  body 
of  colonists,  mainly  Protestant,  had  been  exposed  to  the  prose- 
lytizing zeal  of  the  two  Jesuits.  There  seems  reason  to  think, 
too,  that  the  composition  of  the  colony  was  suspected  by  the  au- 
thorities in  England,  since  on  the  very  eve  of  departure,  the 
ships  were  ordered  back  to  Gravesend,  and  the  emigrants  com- 
pelled to  take  the  oath  of  allegiance.1 

The  result  of  this  and  other  delays  was  that  the  ships  did  not 
leave  England  until  late  in   November.     On  the  2 2d  of  that* 
The  month  they  weighed  anchor  from  Cowes,  where,  as  has 

voyage.  been  conjectured,  they  may  have  touched  for  the  pur- 
pose of  taking  on  board  the  two  Jesuits.  The  delay  in  sailing 
was  in  the  end  no  small  gain  to  the  settlers.  If  the  ships  had 
sailed  at  the  time  originally  fixed,  they  would  have  crossed  the 
line  in  a  season  of  great  heat,  and  the  emigrants  would  have  had 
to  put  up  at  the  same  time  with  the  hardships  of  a  new  country 
and  with  the  severity  of  winter.  Instead  of  this  they  passed  the 
winter  in  the  genial  climate  of  the  West  Indies,  and  found  their 
new  home  ready  to  receive  them  in  all  tjhe  beauty  and  abundance 
of  spring. 

In  the  last  week  of  February  the  colonists  arrived  off  Virginia. 
Their  first  dealings  with  their  neighbors  did  not  bode  well  for 
Establish-  their  future  relations.  Calvert  announced  that  a  cer- 
coiony.  e  tain  territory  called  the  Isle  of  Kent,  which  had  already 
been  occupied  by  Virginians,  was  part  of  Jvlaryland.  No  imme- 
diate attempt  was  made  to  resist  the  claim,  but,  as  we  shall  see, 
it  formed  the  central  point  on  which  a  prolonged  contest  turned. 

Calvert  seems  to  have  been  cautious  and  deliberate  in  his 
choice  of  a  site.  He  cruised  along  the  northern  shores  of  the 
Potomac,  dealing  in  a  friendly  manner  with  the  natives,  and 
aided  by  one  Henry  #!■§",  who  seems  to  have  been  an  independent 
squatter  on  an  outlying  portion  of  the  Virginian  territory.  To 
his  advice  was  due  the  final  choice  of  a  site,  on  the  northern 
shore  of  the  Potomac.     The  banks  of  a  tributary  stream  falling 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1633,  October  19. 


SYSTEM  OF  LAND  TENURE. 


285 


into  the  main  river  had  been  recently  stripped  of  its  inhabitants, 
the  Yoacamacoes,  who  had  fled  before  the  hostility  of  the  Sus- 
quehannStks.  The  settlers  established  themselves  along  this 
stream,  named  by  them  St.  George's  River.  All  the  material 
conditions  of  life  seemed  favorable.  So  good  was  the  first  yield 
of  corn  that  the  settlers  were  able  to  export  some  to  New  Eng- 
land. The  natives  aided  the  strangers  in  the  chase.  The  first 
report  sent  home  declared  that  "  nothing  was  wanting  which 
might  serve  for  commerce  or  pleasure."  ' 

Beyond  these  scanty  fragments  we  know  nothing  of  the  social 
or  political  life  of  the  colony  during  its  first  year.  In  1635, 
The  first  twelve  months  after  the  settlers  landed,  a  legislative 
Assembiy.i  meeting  was  held.  This  appears  to  have  consisted  of 
all  the  freemen  of  the  colony.  Its  only  recorded  act  of  legisla- 
tion was  a  statute  declaring  that  all  offenders  guilty  of  murder 
or  felony  should  suffer  the  same  pains  and  forfeitures  as  they 
would  for  those  crimes  in  England.  It  is,  however,  of  little  mo- 
ment what  were  the  proceedings  of  this  Assembly,  since  they 
were  all  annulled  by  the  Proprietor.  This,  it  has  been  plausibly 
thought,  was  intended  by  him  as  a  claim  to  the  right  of  initiating 
all  legislation. 

In  the  next  year  Baltimore  took  an  important  step  by  definite- 
ly declaring  what  should  be  the  system  of  land  tenure  in  his 
System  of  principality.5*  This  system  resembled  in  principle  that 
tenure.  of  Virginia,  though  not  identical  with  it  in  detail.  It 
contemplated  two  classes  of  proprietors.  Firstly  there  were  those 
who  exported  a  number  of  adult  laborers,  and  who  in  return  re- 
ceived not  less  than  a  thousand  acres  oMand.  Their  tenure 
varied  according  to  the  time  of  their  emigration.  Those  that  went 
out  in  the  first  year  received  for  every  five  men  imported  two 
thousand  acres  at  a  quit-rent  of  four  hundred  pounds  of  wheat. 
.  In  the  case  of  those  who  followed  in  the  next  two  years,  the  quit- 
rent  was  raised  to  six  hundred  pounds  of  wheat,  while  the  requi- 
site number  of  laborers  was  changed  to  ten.  For  those  that  should 
come  later,  the  proportion  of  land  to  laborers  was  retained,  but 
the  rent  was  changed  to  two  pounds  sterling  in  value,  to  be  paid 
in  the  produce  of  the  country.  Estates  of  this  class  were  created 
manors,  and  the  proprietors  themselves  were  invested  with  the 
right  of  holding  courts  baron  and  courts  leet. 

Beside  this,  provision  was  made  for  small  landholders.     These 

1  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  34.  2  lb.,  vol.  ii.  p.  35. 


286  THE  FO  UNDA  TION  OF  MAR  YLAND. 

were  to  receive  a  grant  of  a  hundred  acres  for  themselves,  another 
hundred  for  their  wives  and  for  each  child,  and  fifty  for  every 
man-servant  or  maid  under  forty.  The  rents  to  be  paid  by  this 
class  of  proprietor  varied  with  the  time  of  emigration  from  ten. 
pounds  to  sixty  pounds  of  tobacco,  or  one  shilling  in  money,  for 
fifty  acres.  Women,  too,  who  went  out  at  their  own  cost  were  to 
have  an  allotment  of  fifty  acres  with  a  like  quantity  for  each 
child. 

The  process  by  which  the  colony  extended  its  borders  is  not 
specially  recorded.  But  by  1638  the  colonists  had  spread  across 
Extension  St.  George's  River  in  sufficient  numbers  to  justify  the 
colony.  creation  of  a  fresh  hundred  on  the  west  bank,1  and  it 
is  clear  that  much  the  same  influences  were  at  work  here  as  in 
Virginia  to  spread  the  inhabitants  in  scattered  settlements  over 
the  face  of  the  land. 

The  one  great  feature  of  the  early  history  of  Maryland  is  the 
prolonged  struggle  with  Virginia,  a  struggle  which  began  to  dis- 
Constitu-  turb  the  peace  of  the  colony  from  the  very  outset. 
Maryiand.2  But  before  we  enter  on  that  somewhat  complicated  dis- 
pute, it  would  be  well  to  trace  the  steps  by  which  Baltimore  and 
his  colonists  gradually  worked  out,  by  way  of  compromise,  and 
through  force  of  circumstances,  a  constitution  which,  like  that  of 
Virginia,  adhered  closely  to  the  English  model. 

The  constitution  as  originally  conceived  by  the  Proprietor  was 
to  consist  of  a  governor,  a  Council,  and  an  Assenobly.  The 
functions  of  the  Governor  and  Council  were  not  defined  till  1637. 
Two  Councilors,  however,  Hawley  and  Cornwallis,  were  nom- 
inated at  the  time  of  the  first  settlement,  and  it  is  probable  that 
the  functions  of  the  Council  were  from  the  outset  practically  those 
which  the  Proprietor  afterwards  formally  assigned  to  them.  An 
ordinance  sent  out  by  Baltimore  in  1637  vested  all  judicial  power 
in  the  Governor  and  Council.  The  Governor  was  judge  in  all 
civil  and  criminal  cases,  with  the  reservation  that  in  all  cases 
where  life,  member,  or  freehold  was  concerned  he  should  be 
assisted  by  at  least  two  Councilors. 

The  original  deliberative  and  legislative  body  in  the  case  of 
Maryland  was  a  primary  Assembly  at  which  any  freeman  of  the 
Primary  province  might  present  himself  to  speak  and  vote.  We 
Assembly.    are  ap|-  t0  \00\^   Up0n  a  representative  body  as  the 

1  Bo2man,  vol.  ii.  p.  45. 

*  I  have  taken  the  whole  of  this  account  of  the  constitutional  development  of  the  colony 
from  Boznian.     As  I  have  said  before,  his  work  is  as  much  a  calendar  as  a  history. 


PRIMAR  Y  ASSEMBL  Y. 


:87 


normal  machinery  for  government,  and  to  forget  that  it  is  in  real 
truth  an  ingenious,  complex,  and  highly  artificial  contrivance. 
Only  by  slow  degrees  has  it  superseded  the  primary  Assembly, 
the  concilium  of  the  Germans  described  by  Tacitus,  the  gemot  of 
our  own  forefathers.  The  earlier  instrument  of  government  is  fit 
for  two  states  of  society,  and  two  only.  It  may  be  suitable  to  a 
primitive  race  where,  as  in  the  Cyclopean  community  of  Homer, 
each  man  rules  over  his  own  wife  and  household.  In  such  a 
community  the  objects  of  legislation  and  deliberation  are  but 
scanty.  Much  that  in  later  forms  of  society  comes  under  the 
control  of  the  state  is  left  to  the  patriarchal  government  of  the 
family.  The  competing  interests  which  draw  men  away  from 
public  business  are  few.  The  legislative  Assembly  is  also  the  one 
great  occasion  for  social,  commercial,  and,  it  may  be,  religious 
intercourse.  The  other  condition  of  society  to  which  a  primary 
Assembly  is  adapted  is  that  of  a  small  and  highly-civilized  com- 
monwealth, dwelling  in  a  single  city,  like  the  republics  of  ancient 
Greece  or  mediaeval  Italy.  There,  where  the  freemen  are  in 
truth  an  oligarchy  exempted  from  the  bondage  of  labor,  all  living 
within  the  confines  of  a  single  city  wall,  and  all  trained  to  find 
excitement,  interest,  and  occupation  in  the  debates  of  the  public 
Assembly — there  it  may  be  that  all  will  have  the  taste,  the  oppor- 
tunity, and  the  capacity  for  legislation.  Under  any  other  circum- 
stances the  system  of  a  primary  Assembly  is  beset  by  obvious 
difficulties.  The  chiepbfVhese  is  the  question  of  place.  Farmers 
and  handicraftsmen  cannoi'leave  their  homesteads  and  shops  for 
a  distant  journey.  The  Assembly  of  all  the  freemen  becomes 
the  Assembly  of  the  townsmen  of  the  capital.  That  capital  more 
and  more  absorbs  within  itself  all  the  political  activity  of  the  com- 
monwealth. Again,  there  is  almost  sure  to  be  in,  a  primary  As- 
sembly a  want  of  the  stability  and  sobriety  of  a  representative 
body.  In  the  first  place,  all  political  passions  tend  to  react  upon 
themselves  in  proportion  to  the  size  of  the  area^  over  which  they 
spread.  A  minority  of  fifty  can  do  more  to  check  a  body  of  two 
hundred  than  a  minority  of  five  thousand  can  do  in  a  body  of 
twenty  thousand.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  times  when  a 
primary  Assembly  gives  great  advantages  to  the  members  of 
small  but  united  and  energetic  factions^  Those  who  are  in  favor 
of  a  measure  may  be  actually  outnumbered  by  their  opponents, 
but  the  advocates  may  be  energetic  and  united,  the  opponents 
supine  or  ill  organized.     Every  one  of  the  minority  will  undergo 


288  THE  FOUNDATION  OF  MARYLAND. 

almost  anj  inconvenience  rather  than  not  vote.  Not  one  in  five 
of  the  majority  will  forego  his  day's  labor  or  even  his  day's  pleas- 
ure to  vote.  Yet  the  measures  which  have  been  eagerly  sup- 
ported by  passionate  minorities  and  faintly  opposed  by  languid 
majorities  would  have  often  been  ruinous  to  nations.  A  primary 
Assembly  in  England  in  1679  would  probably  have  made  it  a 
capital  crime  ever  to  have  attended  mass,  and  would  have  tried 
such  offenders  by  a  special  tribunal  with  Titus  Oates  at  its  head. 
A  primary  Assembly  in  1743  would  very  probably  have  sent 
Walpole  to  the  scaffold.  In  each  case  the  majority  would  have 
been  overawed  or  indifferent,  and  the  state  would  have  done  in 
haste  what  every  later  generation  would  have  repented  at  leisure. 

In  a  community  like  Maryland,  the  first  of  these  evils  was 
sure  to  be  soon  felt.  At  the  outset,  while  the  colony  was  but  a 
single  encampment  of  log  huts,  all  the  freemen  might  easily  meet 
together  for  the  trifling  business  of  the  colony.  But  as  the  settle- 
ments gradually  expanded  over  a  wider  area,  how  could  the 
planter  leave  his  corn  to  be  eaten  by  deer,  his  cattle  to  stray  in 
the  woods,  his  swine  to  be  stolen  by  Indians  ?  Every  year  the 
Assembly  would  have  become  more  and  more  a  little  oligarchy 
of  those  living  at  or  near  the  centre  of  government. 

One  would  suppose  that  the  remedy  of  representation  would  at 
once  have  suggested  itself.  But  before  that  was  adopted  a  more 
cumbrous  and  far  less  efficient  device  was  tried.     In 

proxies,  -^g  the  Assembly  met  for  the  second  time.  Their 
proceedings,  unlike  those  of  the  previous  session,  are  recorded. 
On  this  occasion  those  who  could  not  appear  in  person  were  al- 
lowed to  send  proxies.  If  such  a  system  avoids  the  evils  incident 
to  a  primary  body,  it  brings  with  it  other  evils  of  a  directly  con- 
trary kind.  It  may  be  bad  that  an  energetic  and  ever-present 
minority  should  have  everything  its  own  way.  It  is  worse  that 
energy  and  constant  attendance  should  count  for  nothing,  and 
that  the  voter  who  delegates  his  power  to  another  should  have 
as  full  a  share  in  legislation  as  tr^e  voter  who  exerts  himself  to 
attend.  / 

The  evils  of  this  system  wereJamply  illustrated  in  the  events  of 
the  year.  The  Assembly,  uncteterred  by  its  previous  failure,  pro- 
The  ceeded  to  enact  a/set  of  laws.      Of  these  only   the 

0/1638.  y  titles  remain.  This  matters  the  less  as  it  is  probable 
that  they  closely  resemblecJ  those  which  were  successfully  pro- 
posed in  the  following  year/ 


System 
of  1 


PROXIES.  289 

While  the  proposals  of  the  Assembly,  or  rather  of  a  part  of  it, 
were  under  discussion,  a  rival  set  of  laws  was  sent  out  by  Balti- 
more. Apart  from  the  intrinsic  merits  or  demerits  of  the  pro- 
posed laws,  it  was  clearly  a  most  serious  question  whether  the 
initiative  in  legislation  was  to  belong  to  the  Proprietor  or  the 
colonists. 

The  division  which  followed  illustrated  forcibly  the  evils  of 
the  proxy  system.  The  acts  sent  out  by  the  Proprietor  were  re- 
jected by  thirty-seven  votes  to  eighteen.  Doubtless  there  were 
proxies  on  both  sides,  but  in  the  minority  twelve  of  them  were  in 
two  hands,  those  of  the  Governor  and  of  Councilor  Sawyer, 
who  had  been  lately  associated  with  Hawley  and  Cornwallis. 
No  better  illustration  could  have  been  found  of  the  danger  to 
the  liberties  of  the  colony  involved  in  this  anomalous  system. 

A  compromise  was  then  proposed,  apparently  by  Cornwallis. 
The  Assembly  was  to  reject  the  laws  sent  out  by  the  Proprietor. 
At  the  same  time  it  was  to  abandon  its  own  claim  to  legislation 
and  to  pass  a  formal  declaration  accepting  the  laws  of  England. 
This  proposal,  however,  seems  to  have  fallen  through.  The 
enactments  just  proposed  were  carried,  forwarded  to  the  Proprie- 
tor, and,  as  before,  rejected. 

Baltimore's  motives  throughout  the  whole  of  these  affairs,  as 
indeed  throughout  his  career,  are  hard  to  be  understood.  He 
seems  first  to  have  asserted  a  claim  to  what  was  practically  al- 
most absolute  power,  then,  without  any  apparent  reason,  to  have 
abandoned  this  position,  and  in  a  temperate  letter  empowered  his 
brother  as  Governor  to  assent  to  such  laws  as  should  be  "  con- 
certed with  and  approved  of  by  the  freemen  or  their  deputies." 
This  consent  was  to  be  subsequently  ratified  by  the  Proprietor 
himself. 

The  reference  in  the  letter  to  the  freemen  "  or  their  deputies  " 
is  a  clear  proof  that  Baltimore  contemplated  the  continuance  of 
this  most  inconvenient  and  irrational  system  of  a. mixed  Assem- 
bly consisting  in  part  of  the  freemen  themselves,  in  part  of  their 
representatives. 

Early  in  the  next  year  another  Assembly  was  called.  Its  con- 
stitution brought  the  colonists  one  step  nearer  to  the  system  of 
Assembly  representation.  Regular  writs  were  issued  to  the  various 
of  1639.  hundreds  instructing  them  to  return  representatives. 
Yet  after  the  election  one  person  at  least  came  forward  and 
claimed  the  right  of  appearing  in  person  on  the  ground  that  he 

*9 


2  9  o  THE  FO  UN  DA  TION  OF  MA  R  YLA  ND. 

had  voted  in  the  minority,  and  so  was  not  represented.  The 
claim  seems  to  have  been  allowed,  and  nothing  could  illustrate 
more  forcibly  the  complex  and  hybrid  system  on  which  this  As- 
sembly had  been  formed.  It  showed  that  the  logical  result  of 
that  principle  was  that  in  a  constituency  of  fifty,  a  majority  of 
four-fifths  might  have  two  votes  and  a  minority  of  one-fifth,  ten. 

This  was  not  the  only  anomaly  in  the  constitution  of  the  As- 
sembly. The  Proprietor  claimed,  and  as  it  would  seem  obtained 
without  challenge,  the  right  of  summoning  members  by  writ. 
This  claim  evidently  proceeds  from  a  confusion  in  the  original 
constitution  of  the  legislature.  That  an  upper  chamber  should 
be  nominated  by  the  Proprietor  was  only  in  accordance  with  the 
principles  of  the  English  constitution.  But  that  arrangement  pre- 
supposes a  division  of  the  legislature  into  two  chambers.  To  al- 
low it  while  the  whole  body,  those  summoned  by  writ  and  those 
elected  by  popular  suffrage,  sat,  vote,d,  and  deliberated  together, 
was  simply  to  enable  the  Proprietor  to  swamp  the  representation 
of  the  Commons  with  his  own  creatures. 

The  proceedings  of  this  Assembly  were  in  themselves  of  suffi- 
cient importance  to  deserve  a  full  notice.  But  before  describing 
Gradual       them  it  will  be  best  to  follow  out  the  process  by  which 

establish-       .  ..  r.  ..  Z        -      .,; 

ment  of  the  machinery  of  the  constitution  assumed  its  final 
tfon.esen  a"  shape.  The  incongruous  combination  of  a  representa- 
tive with  a  primary  Assembly  disappeared  three  years  later.  The 
legislature  when  it  met  in  1639  declared  by  its  first  act  that  the 
Assembly  should  consist  of  the  Governor  and  Secretary,  those 
named  by  special  writ,  lords  of  manors,  one  or  two  Burgesses 
from  every  hundred,  and  all  freemen  who  had  not  consented  to 
the  aforesaid  elections.  At  the  same  time  it  was  enacted  that 
Assemblies  should  be  held  at  least  once  in  every  three  years. 

In  the  next  Assembly  the  right  of  personal  appearance  was 
in  at  least  one  instance  claimed  and  refused.  Nevertheless,  in 
1642  the  Governor  reverted  to  the  earlier  system,  and  required 
the  freemen  of  the  colony  to  appear  either  by  themselves  or  their 
deputies.  Out  of  one  hundred  and  six  persons  who  obeyed  this 
summons,  seventy-two  availed  themselves  of  the  right  to  send 
proxies.  One  of  the  first  proceedings  of  the  Assembly  was  to 
define  the  constitution  of  the  legislature  by  limiting  the  popular 
representation  to  the  elected  deputies,  and  with  this  reform  the 
last  trace  of  the  earlier  system  disappears. 

It  should  be  noticed  that  the  records  of  this  Assembly  throw 


DISPUTE  WITH  VIRGINIA.  291 

some  light  on  the  social  condition  of  the  colony.  It  is  clear 
that  the  right  of  appearing  either  in  person  or  by  deputy  extended 
to  all  freemen,  to  all,  that  is,  who  were  not  indented  servants. 
It  is  also  recorded  that  the  number  of  such  freemen  was  one 
hundred  and  eighty-two,  of  whom  seventy-six  failed  to  exercise 
their  rights.  Considering  the  extent  of  ground  which  the  colony 
now  covered  and  the  importance  of  its  commerce,  we  may  be 
sure  that  a  considerable  number  of  these  hundred  and  eighty-two 
were  large  landed  proprietors ;  and  thus  we  see  how  insignificant 
a  portion  of  the  community  were  the  small  freeholders,  who  stood 
between  the  large  planters  and  their  indented  servants. 

The  other  anomaly,  the  right  of  the  Proprietor  to  add  members 
to  the  Assembly,  endured  for  some  years  longer.  That  it  did  so 
is  perhaps  the  best  evidence  that  it  was  never  turned  to  the  per- 
nicious uses  of  which  it  was  capable.  At  length,  in  1647,  the 
Assembly  was  divided  into  two  chambers,  the  lower  consisting  of  < 
the  Burgesses,  the  upper  of  the  Councilors  and  those  specially 
summoned  by  the  Proprietor.  This  change  finally  brought  the 
constitution  of  Maryland  into  conformity  with  that  of  the  mother 
country  and  of  Virginia. 

The  events,  if  they  can  be  so  called,  which  have  just  been  re- 
counted are  interesting  as  a  study  in  the  development  of  institu- 
Dispute  '  tions ;  in  the  eyes  of  contemporaries  they  were  over- 
ginia.  irV  shadowed  by  more  stirring  matters  which  absorbed 
nearly  all  the  energies  of  the  infant  community.  The  struggle 
with  Virginia  was  the  one  leading  thread  which  runs  through  all 
the  early  history  of  the  colony,  and  with  which  everything  con-, 
nects  itself.  The  hostility  between  Papist  and  Puritan,  the  con- 
flict between  the  allies  of  the  crown  and  the  allies  of  the  Com- 
monwealth, all  blended  themselves  with  this  and  became  in  some 
sort  episodes  in  the  contest  between  the  two  colonies. 

If  the  grievance  had  been  a  merely  theoretical  one,  if  Balti- 
more's patent  had  only  included  certain  land  formally  belonging 
to  Virginia,  but  as  yet  unoccupied,  we  may  doubt  whether  the  le- 
gal possessors  would  have  cared  to  make  good  their  title  for  the 
benefit  of  unborn  descendants  against  an  influential  nobleman, 
the  favorite  of  the  king.  Unhappily  a  part  of  the  debatable 
ground  was  of  special  value  to  Virginia.  The  Isle  of  Kent  in 
the  Chesapeake  Bay  was  nearly  eighty  miles  north  of  Virginia, 
and  consequently  commanded  the  Maryland  settlements  at  the 
mouth  of  the  Bay.     In  1 63 1  a  certain  number  of  Virginian  mer- 


2  9  2  THE  FO  UNDA  TION  OF  MA  R  YLA  ND. 

chants  had  obtained  a  special  commission  from  the  crown  to  trade 
with  the  natives  at  Kent  Island.  Their  representative^  is  Will- 
iam Clayborne,  a  land  surveyor  by  trade,  a  Councilor  fonBCginia. 
at  one  time  Secretary  for  the  colony,  and  one  of  those  wraohad 
opposed  Harvey.  He  appears  to  have  been  a  resolute,  energetic, 
and  somewhat  unscrupulous  man,  and  his  personal  character  had 
no  small  share  in  determining  the  relations  between  the  two  colo- 
nies. It  is  not  easy  to  make  out  what  was  the  precise  nature  of 
the  settlement  on  the  Isle  of  Kent,  how  far  it  was  merely  a  sta- 
tion for  trade,  and  how  far  a  permanent  agricultural  community. 
All  we  know  definitely  is  that  as  early  as  1625  it  had  a  hundred 
occupants,  that  in  1631  it  returned  a  representative  to  the  Vir- 
ginian Assembly,1  and  that  it  was  specially  valued  as  a  trading 
station.  This  being  so,  it  is  no.  matter  for  wonder  that  the  Vir- 
ginians at  once  resented  the  threatened  intrusion.  A  mere  out- 
lying plantation  might  have  been  sacrificed,  but  it  is  clear  that 
the  Isle  of  Kent  was  a  possession  of  value  to  the  whole  colony, 
while,  moreover,  a  station  for  trading  with  the  natives  was  just 
the  very  place  where  the  interference  of  a  rival  government"  was 
most  to  be  dreaded. 

It  would  be  profitless  to  inquire  the  precise  steps  with  which  the 
quarrel  began.  Both  parties  claimed  the  place,  and  both,  it  is 
Hostilities  clear,  were  prepared  to  resort  to  force  in  defense  of  that 
■thetwo1  clami-  In  sucn  a  case  a  collision  is  a  mere  question  of 
colonies,  time  and  opportunity,  and  whether  the  disputants  be 
great  nations  or  petty  colonies,  it  is  scarcely  worth  while  to  dis- 
cuss which  was  the  aggressor. 

Scarcely  had  the  first  Maryland  settlers  reached  the  shores  of 
the  Chesapeake  Bay  and  chosen  the  site  of  their  abode,  when  the 
first  symptoms  of  hostility  were  felt.  Clayborne  was  charged 
with  having  alarmed  the  Indians  by  telling  them  that  the  hew 
-colonists  were  Spaniards.2  Some  faint  rumor  of  that  tyrannical  race 
: seems  to  have  reached  the  shores  of  the  Chesapeake  Bay,  and 
ithe  dread  of  their  presence  put  an  end  for  a  while  to  the  friend- 
ly relations  between  the  settlers  and  the  savages.  The  latter  dis- 
covered their  error  and  harmony  was  restored;  but  if  the*  inter- 
ruption of  friendship  was  really  due  to  Clayborne,  it  transfers  the 
odium  of  the  quarrel  from  the  trespassers  to  the  man  who  thus 
forgot  the  claims  of  humanity  and  kinship. 

In  the  spring  of  1634  the  question  of  the  Isle  of  Kent  was 

1  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  154. 

2  Bozman  states  this,  but  does  not  give  his  authority. 


CLAIMS  TO  THE  ISLE  OF  KENT.  293 

formally  discussed  by  the  Council  of  Virginia.  The  immediate 
occasion  of  debate  was  an  application  from  Clayborne.  He  had 
been*r2S^noned  by  the  Governor  of  Maryland  to  relinquish  all 
deper!«ffcrjce  on  Virginia,  and  to  consider  himself  a  member  of  the 
new  colony.  What  course,  he  asked,  should  he  pursue  ?  The 
Council  resolved  that  the  Isle  of  Kent  was  in  no  way  to  be  dis- 
tinguished from  the  rest  of  the  territory  of  Virginia,  and  that  they 
would  maintain  their  right  to  it,  at  the  same  time  obeying  the 
king's  request  by  preserving  friendly  relations  with  Maryland. 
Soon  after,  the  matter  came  before  the  notice  of  the  Committee 
of  the  Privy  Council  for  the  Plantations.  Their  answer,  though 
not  quite  explicit,  since  it  neither  named  Maryland  nor  the  Isle 
of  Kent,  was  yet  in  tone  favorable  to  Virginia.  It  declared  that 
the  corporate  interests  of  that  colony  were  not  to  be  disregarded, 
and  it  definitely  authorized  the  Governor  and  Council  to  dispose 
by  grant  of  all  lands  which  had  been  legally  under  their  control 
before  1625.1 

In  the  next  month  Clayborne's  case  was  formally  laid  before 
the  king,  not  by  Clayborne  himself,  but  his  partners  in  the  trad- 
Adtion  ing  venture  at  Kent  Island.  They  set  forth  Clayborne's 
crown.  purchase  of  that  place  from  the  natives,  and  his  labors 
in  establishing  a  factory  there.2  Their  petition  met  with  a  favor- 
able hearing.  An  injunction  was  sent  by  the  king  to  the  Gover- 
nor and  Council  of  Virginia  and  to  all  other  colonial  Governors 
to  assist  Clayborne  and  the  planters  in  Kent  Island,  and  in  par- 
ticular forbidding  Baltimore  and  his  agents  to  do  them  violence.3 
This,  however,  was  accompanied  by  a  special  injunction  from  the 
king  to  Harvey,  desiring  him  to  support  Baltimore,  and  to  pro- 
tect him  against  Clayborne's  malicious  practices.4  No  better 
commentary  could  be  found  on  the  unsatisfactory  condition  of 
our  colonial  government  than  the  confused  and  contradictory 
policy  adopted  in  dealing  with  this  dispute. 

The  assertion  of  Clayborne's  claim  soon  led  to  hostilities.  In 
the  spring  of  1634,  even  while  the  question  was  still  before  the 
Privy  Qpuncil,  there  seem  to  have  been  petty  conflicts  in  which 
the  Mary  landers  harassed  the  inhabitants  of  the  island  and  inter- 
rupted their  trade  with  the  Indians.5  Early  in  the  next  year 
Clayborne  took  steps  which  were  virtually  a  declaration  of  war. 
He  sent  out  a  pinnace  with  fourteen  men.  giving  them  instruc- 
tions to  attack  and  capture  any  boats  belonging  to  Maryland. 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1634,  July  22.  2  lb.,  1634,  October.  3  lb.,  1634,  October  8. 

*  16.,  1634,  September  iS,  27.  %  5  This  is  evident  from  the  above  papers. 


2  94  THE  FO  UNDA  TIOX  OF  MA  R  YLA  ND. 

Calvert  met  this  by  arming  two  small  vessels  under  the  command 
of  Cornwallis.  The  vessels  met:  the  Virginians,  it  is  said, 
opened  fire,  and  a  fight  followed  in  which  three  Virginians  and 
one  Mary  lander  were  killed.1 

All  hopes  of  a  friendly  settlement  Were  now  at  an  end.  Clay- 
borne  retreated  to  Virginia.  The  government  of  Maryland  at- 
Success  of  tempted  to  obtain  possession  of  his  person  as  a  crira- 
Maryland.  [na\  by  an  application  to  the  Virginian  government. 
This  was  refused,  and  Clayborne,  either  of  his  own  accord,  or  by 
order  of  Harvey,  went  to  England  with  the  necessary  witnesses, 
to  lay  his  case  before  the  Privy  Council.  Meanwhile,  the- imme- 
diate fruit  of  victory  appeared  to  rest  with  the  Marylanders. 
One  Captain  Evelyn  was  specially  appointed  Governor,  or,  as  he 
was  styled,  Commander  of  the  Isle  of  Kent,  with  a  Council  of 
six  assistants.  With  their  advice  he  was  to  try  petty  cases,  civil 
and  criminal.  He  was  also  empowered  to  appoint  civil  officers 
and  generally  to  preserve  the  peace  of  the  island.  In  the  follow- 
ing spring  a  writ  was  issued  by  the  Governor,  summoning  Eve- 
lyn jbimself  to  the  Assembly,  and  ordering  him  to  call  together 
the  freemen,  to  persuade  as  many  of  them  as  should  think  fit  to 
appear  personally  at  the  Assembly,  and  to  explain  to  the  rest  that 
they  had  liberty  to  attend  there  either  in  person  or  by  deputy  as 
they  pleased.2  This  summons  is  interesting  in  more  ways  than 
one.  It  shows  that  Baltimore,  or  at  least  his  representative,  Cal- 
vert, intended  to  treat  the  Isle  of  Kent,  not  as  an  outlying  de- 
pendency, but  as  an  integral  part  of  the  colony.  At  the  same 
time  it  throws  light  on  the  curious  mixture  of  a  primary  and  a 
representative  Assembly,  and  shows  how  loosely  and  freely  the 
power  of  summoning  special  members  was  used  when  it  could 
be  delegated  without  any  restraint  to  the  commander  of  a  dis- 
trict. 

It  was  easier  to  treat  the  Isle  of  Kent  as  a  part  of  the  colony 
in  theory  than  to  make  it  so  in  practice.  The  inhabitants  refused 
to  recognize  their  new  rulers,  resisted  Calvert's  judgments,  both 
in  civil  and  criminal  cases,  rescued  prisoners  from  the  hands  of 
his  officers,  and,  it  was  even  alleged,  conspired  with  the  Indians 
against  the  safety  of  the  colony.  So  serious  was  the  state  of 
Difficulties  affairs  that  Calvert  left  St.  Mary's  during  the  session  of 
isiehofhe  tne  Assembly,  deputing  his  authority  to  Sawyer,  and 
Kent-  sailed  to  the  Isle  of  Kent,  there  to  deal  with  the  offend- 

1  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  pp.  35,  61.     In  the  latter  passage  the  indictments  are  quoted  verbatim. 

2  lb.,  vol.  ii.  p,  47. 


CLAYBORNE' S  TRADING  PROJECT.  295 

ers  by  martial  law.1  Of  the  results  of  this  expedition  we  know 
nothing.  On  the  return  of  the  Governor,  criminal  proceedings 
were  instituted  against  Clayborne  and  one  of  his  chief  support- 
ers for  the  murder  of  the  Marylander  who*  had  fallen  in  the 
skirmish  at  the  island.  Clayborne  in  his  absence  was  proceeded 
against  by  attainder,  his  follower  Smith  by  a  formal  trial  before 
the  Assembly  as  the  chief  criminal  court,  and  both  were  found 
guilty.  At  the  same  time  the  Assembly  instituted  an  inquiry  into 
the  deaths  of  the  Virginians  who  had  fallen,  and  acquitted  Corn- 
wallis  and  his  supporters  as  having  acted  in  self-defense.  Of 
Smith's  fate  we  hear  nothing. 

The  dispute  now  entered  into  a  new  phase.  Clayborne  on  his 
return  to  England  in  1637  laid  his  case  before  the  king.  From 
ciaybome's  the  favor  with  which  his  application  was  entertained,  it 
scheme.  has  been  thought  that  he  had  some  influential  patron 
at  court.  This  patron,  it  has  been  suspected,  was  Sir  William 
Alexander,  the  king's  Secretary  for  Scotland.2  He  had  begun 
life  as  a  needy  Scotch  adventurer  at  the  court  of  James  I.  There 
his  nationality,  his  versatile  genius,  and  a  fair  share  of  literary 
ability  made  him  a  leading  figure,  and  his  prosperity  was  contin- 
ued under  Charles  I.3  One  of  his  various  projects  was  the  forma- 
tion of  a  settlement  in  Nova  Scotia,  dependent  mainly  on  the  fur 
trade,  and  it  seems  likely  that  he  saw  his  way  towards  incorporat- 
ing Clayborne's  scheme  with  his  own.  It  was  probably  in  con- 
sequence of  his  support  that  Clayborne,  not  content  with  making 
good  his  claim  to  the  Isle  of  Kent,  tried  to  obtain  the  sanction 
of  the  king  for  fresh  acquisitions.  He  had  established  a  small 
settlement,,  probably  a  mere  outlying  factory  for  trade,  near  the 
head  of  the  Chesapeake  Bay.  Here  he  hoped  to  create  a  fur 
trade  with  the  Indians  along  the  banks  of  the  Susquehannah. 
To  carry  out  this  project  he  petitioned  for  a  grant  of  land  seveijty- 
two  miles  in  width,  and  extending  the  whole  length  of  the  river 
as  far  as  the  great  lakes  of  Canada.  For  this  he  proposed  to  pay 
a  quit-rent  of  a  hundred  pounds  a  year,  fifty  for  the  Isle  of  Kent 
and  fifty  for  his  new  possession.4  This  request  was  at  first  received 
favorably.  The  king  referred  it,  with  an  expression  of  approval, 
to  the  Commissioners  for  Plantations.     At  the  same  time -he  sent 

1  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  62. 

2  Chalmers's  A  merican  Annals. 

3  Alexander's  character  and  his  career  as  a  colonial  adventurer  are  sketched  in  Kirke's 
Conquest  of  Canada. 

4  This  petition  and  the  king's  answer  are  given  by  Bozman  in  a  note,  vol.  ii.  p.  583. 


2 96  THE  FO  UNDA  TION  OF  MAR  YLAND. 

a  letter  to  Baltimore  advising  him  to  leave  Clayborne  and  his 
partners  for  the  present  unmolested.  There  was  not  in  this  latter 
proceeding  anything  more  than  a  reasonable  desire  that  hostilities 
should  be  stayed  pendente  lite.  Nevertheless  the  favor  which 
Clayborne's  petition  met  with  from  the  king  is  a  good  illustration 
of  the  recklessness  with  which  the  soil  of  America  was  dealt  with 
by  the  English  crown.  Hitherto  one  principle  had  been  always 
maintained  :  that  important  grants  of  land  from  the  crown  should 
have  a  fixed  limit  of  sea-board  with  an  unlimited  right  of  exten- 
sion inland  between  two  parallel  lines.  Clayborne's  petition,  if 
granted,  would  have  wholly  destroyed  this  arrangement.  It 
would  have  established  a  belt  of  trading  stations  along  the  west- 
ern frontier  of  the  other  colonies,  and  would  thus  have  placed 
their  relations  with  the  Indians  at  the  mercy  of  a  merchant  com- 
pany over  which  the  colonists  would  have  no  control.  Clay- 
borne,  however,  had  less  influence  with  the  Commissioners  than 
with  the  crown.  His  petition  was  heard  and  refused.  Baltimore 
was  confirmed  in  his  claim  to  the  Isle  of  Kent,  while,  as  on  a 
previous  occasion,  the  petitioners  were  left  to  seek  their  remedy 
at  law.1 

This  might  have  been  supposed  to  settle  the  matter  between 
Maryland  and  Virginia.  For  a  while  all  disputes  seem  to  have 
t  been  set  at  rest,  and  the  claim  of  Baltimore  to  exercise  his  pro- 
prietary authority  over  the  Isle  of  Kent  was  peaceably  accepted. 
Clayborne's  claim,  however,  was  only  dormant,  not  extinct,  and 
the  overthrow  of  the  royal  authority  and  the  ascendency  of  the 
Parliament  in  Maryland  at  once  served  to  reawaken  it. 

In  the  mean  time  the  internal  affairs  of  Maryland,  and  the 
dealings  of  the  settlers  with  the  Indians,  require  some  notice. 
Legislative  We  have  already  seen  how  conspicuous  a  part  the  As- 
system.  sembly  of  1639  played  in  the  constitutional  history  of 
Maryland.  Over  and  above  this,  its  legislative  proceedings  were 
in  themselves  of  no  small  importance.  In  considering  them  we 
cannot  fail  to  be  struck  with  a  difference  which  from  the  outset 
distinguished  the  legislation  of  Maryland  from  that  of  Virginia. 
The  latter  was  conspicuous  for  what  we  may  call  its  practical  and 
hand-to-mouth  character.  Enactments  were  made  as  the  need 
for  them  arose.  There  was  little  idea  of  producing  a  continuous 
or  symmetrical  system.  It  is  possible  that  the  memory  of  that 
ferocious  code  under  which  the  early  settlers  had  suffered  may 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1638,  Aprils 


LEGISLA  TION  IN  MAR  YLAND.  297 

have  had  a  share  in  determining  their  successors  to  cling  to  the 
common  law  of  England,  and  to  avoid «any  attempt  at  producing 
a  code  for  themselves.  In  Maryland,  on  the  contrary,  we  see 
something  of  that  love  for  an  unnecessarily  elaborate  code  which 
is  not  uncommon  in  young  communities,  and  of  which  the  Amer- 
ican colonies  furnished  more  than  one  example.  The  Maryland 
laws  of  1639  were  evidently  designed  as  a  complete  judicial  and 
constitutional  system,  inasmuch  as  they  were  passed  not  as  so 
many  independent  and  separate  Acts,  but  in  a  mass.1  They  be- 
gan with  a  somewhat  vague  declaration  that  "  Holy  Church  " 
within  the  province  should  have  all  her  rights  and  liberties. 
This  clause  was  probably  borrowed  from.  Magna  Charta  without 
any  definite  idea  of  its  special  application.  The  second  clause 
was  apparently  intended  to  qualify  any  danger  which  might  lurk 
in  the  first,  and  prescribed  an  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  king. 
The  third  declared  that  the  Lord  Proprietor  should  have  all  his 
rights  and  prerogatives.  The  fourth  claimed  for  the  inhabitants 
all  their  rights  and  liberties  according  to  the  Great  Charter  of 
England.  These  four  Acts  must  clearly  be  looked  on  as  a  sort 
of  formal  preamble,  a  declaration  of  the  position  of  the  crown, 
the  Lord  Proprietor,  the  Church,  and  the  Commonalty.  Hav- 
ing disposed  of  these,  the  Assembly  went  on  to  enact  a  criminal 
code,  and  to  provide  means  for  its  execution. 

There  is  not  much  in  this  penal  code  which  demands  our  at- 
tention. In  no  marked  respect  did  it  differ,  either  for  good  or 
Penal  evu>  h°m  tne  ordinary  legislative  .principles  of  that  age. 

code.  as  regarded  religious  nonconformity  and  kindred  of- 

fenses, the  law  was  severe  in  appearance,  probably  mild  in  prac- 
tice. Blasphemy,  sacrilege,  sorcery,  and  idolatry  were  all  capital 
crimes.  The  mention  of  the  last  in  a  community  founded  by  a 
Papist  and  in  large  part  inhabited  by  Papists,  must  have  sounded 
a  strange  piece  of  hypocrisy  in  the  ears  of  Puritans.  Such  a  code 
is  wholly  at  variance  with  the  true  principles  of  religious  liberty. 
Yet  we  may  be  sure  that  the  Nonconformist  was  better  off  under 
the  rule  of  Papists  who  were  amenable  to  English  law  and  in 
some  degree  to  English  public  opinion,  than  he  would  have  been 
in  a  strictly  Anglican  community. 

The  religious  principles  of  the  Assembly  showed  themselves, 
not  by  any  original  legislation,  but  by  the  somewhat  ingenious  ex- 
Laws  about  pedient  of  formally  re-enacting  English  statutes  framed 
religion.       jn  eariier  times  and  still  unrepealed  though  obsolete. 

1  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  107.     Bacon's  Laws  of  Maryland. 


^9S 


THE  FOUNDATION  OF  MARYLAND. 


Clergy  were  to  be  exempt  from  capital  punishment,  and  were  to 
be  pardoned  in  the  case  of  certain  offenses  committed  for  the  first 
time.  An  Act  was  also  passed  re-enacting  the  statute  of  Edward 
VI.  which  enforced  the  eating  of  fish  on  certain  days.  That 
statute  had  been  passed  by  a  Protestant  legislature  in  the  interests 
of  commerce,  and  possibly  of  public  health  and  economy.  The 
Romanists  of  Maryland  re-enacted  it  on  behalf  of  the  usage 
of  their  own  Church. 

The  supreme  judicial  power  was,  as  we  have  seen,  vested  in 
the  Governor  and  Council.  In  civil  cases  their  jurisdiction  was 
judicial  final.  In  matters  affecting  life  or  limb,  the  court  was 
system.  t0  be  assisted  by  a  jury  of  twelve.  Furthermore,  by  a 
somewhat  complex  arrangement,  three  other  courts  were  consti- 
tuted, in  all  of  which  the  Governor  sat  as  judge,  though  in  a  dif- 
ferent capacity  in  each.  He  presided  over  the  admiralty  court  as 
Admiral,  over  the  chancery  court  as  Chancellor,  and  by  a  special 
commission  over  the  so-called  praetorial  court  of  St.  Mary's,  a 
tribunal  appointed  to  try  certain  specified  offenses.  In  this  last 
capacity  he  was  to  be  assisted  by  his  Secretary  and  Council. 
Furthermore  he  was  to  sit  as  judge  of  the  county  court  at  St. 
Mary's,  assisted  by  Commissioners  specially  appointed  by  the 
Proprietor.  This  court  was  to  try  misdemeanors,  and  it  was  also 
to  preside  over  the  grand  jury,  consisting  of  seven  freemen,  who 
were  to  present  offenders  for  trial  in  the  praetorial  court. 

Local  jurisdiction  over  small  cases  in  the  various  hundreds  was 
given  to  justices  of  the  peace,  while  the  Commander  of  the  Isle 
of  Kent  was  invested  with  special  judicial  powers  in  his  own 
province.  In  all  these  cases  a  right  of  appeal  to  the  supreme 
court  was  allowed,  and  it  was  also  provided,  by  an  arrangement 
hitherto  unknown  in  the  colonies,  that  the  Governor  and  Council 
should  at  times  visit  the  Island  of  Kent,  and  there  sit  as  a  court 
of  assize.  - 

No  one  can  fail  to  be  struck  with  the  needless  elaboration  and 
cumbrousness  of  much  of  this  legislation.  To  copy  the  complex- 
General  ities  of  the  English  judicial  system,  complexities  inevi- 
of  the  laws,  table  in  a  system  which  was  the  slow  growth  of 
centuries,  but  which  might  easily  have  been  avoided  in  a  new 
country,  was  like  the  servile  fidelity  of  the  Chinese  artisan  who 
reproduces  the  flaw  in  his  pattern.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the 
privilege  of  clergy  in  cases  of  felony.  So,  too,  we  may  notice  a 
tendency  to  reproduce  that  which,  for  want  of  a  better  name,  we 


CONDITION  OF  IND  US  TRY.  2  99  si 

must  call  the  feudal  character  of  the  mother  country.  We  find 
illustrations  of  this  in  the  titles  of  the  first  laws  proposed  in  1635, 
and  then  vetoed  by  the  Proprietor.  Such  are  the  Acts  for  the 
founding  of  manors,  for  baronies,  for  services  to  be  performed  for 
manors  and  freeholds.  It  is  clear,  too,  from  other  evidence,  that 
an  order  of  nobility  was  contemplated.  We  have  already  seen 
that  the  lordship  of  a  manor  carried  with  it  a  seat  in  the  Assem- 
bly. It  also  gave  the  right  of  being  tried  by  a  jury  taken  from 
among  the  lords  of  manors,  although  with  the  necessary  proviso, 
that  if  twelve  such  could  not  be  found,  their  places  should  be 
supplied  by  freemen.  Moreover,  the  lords  of  manors  were  to 
enjoy  another  privilege  of  the  English  nobility  in  being  beheaded 
if  found  guilty  of  felony,  instead  of  being  hanged. 

Happily  the  welfare  of  a  young  community  depends  on  other 
considerations  than  the  symmetry  and  consistency  of  its  political 
Condition  svstem>  and  there  is  little  reason  to  doubt  that  Mary- 
of  industry.  ian(}  enjoyed  all  the  conditions  needful  for  prosperity 
and  availed  herself  of  them.  None  of  our  early  American 
colonies  began  their  commercial  and  industrial  career  on  so  solid 
and  well-considered  a  basis.  We  have  seen  the  difficulties  which 
beset  the  infancy  of  Virginia,  how  she  was  driven  to  put  up  with 
the  sweepings  of  the. gaols,  how  she  became  a  refuge  for  helpless- 
ness, improvidence,  and  crime.  In  Plymouth  and  Massachusetts 
political  and  religious  considerations  came  first,  and  though  in 
the  long  run  they  aided  the  commercial  prosperity  of  those 
communities,  they  at  first  restricted  the  choice  of  settlers.  Mary- 
land profited  by  the  example  of  Virginia,  and  her  economical 
welfare  was  cared  for  in  a  measure  seldom  surpassed  in  the  his- 
tory of  colonization.  This  is  well  shown  in  a  pamphlet  published 
in  1635.1  The  writer,  it  is  evident,  was  a  resident  in  London, 
acting  as  agent  for  the  colony  and  ready  to  assist  would-be  set- 
tlers with  advice  and  outfit.  The  advantages  and  the  peculiarities 
of  the  country  are  set  forth  in  a  singularly  clear  and  practical 
manner.  Detailed  instructions  are  furnished  as  to  the  provision 
which  a  settler  should  make  for  entering  on  his  new  mode  of  life. 
He  was  not  to  depend  on  the  resources  of  the  colony  for  the  first 
year,  but  to  bring  out  a  sufficient  supply  of  meal.  Thus  his  sub- 
sistence would  be  provided  for  while  he  built  his  house  and 
inclosed  his  farm.  He  was  also  to  bring  the  iron  for  his  house, 
a  watch-dog,  seed,  both  of  corn  and  fruit-trees,  and   appliances 

1  This  is  the  pamphlet  above  referred  to,  p.  275. 


3oo  THE  EO  UNDA  TION  OF  MAR  YLAND. 

for  fowling  and  fishing.  He  was  advised,  too,  to  provide  him- 
self with  groceries  and  cloth  which  he  could  profitably  exchange  for 
cattle.  The  enumeration  of  the  artisans  whom  each  planter  is  to 
import  gives  us  a  good  idea  of  the  system  of  life  contemplated. 
Every  planter  is  recommended  to  bring  nineteen  skilled  crafts- 
men, each  of  a  different  trade,  all  enumerated.  Beside  those 
who  were  obviously  needed,  there  was  to  be  a  shipwright,  a  miller, 
a  brickmaker,  a  bricklayer,  a  fisherman,  a  cutler,  and  a  leather- 
dresser.  If  the  would-be  planter  could  not  find  skilled  laborers, 
the  writer  would  procure  them  for  him.  There  was  work,  too, 
for  "  lusty  young  men,"  even  if  they  did  not  possess  any  special 
skill.  A  form  of  agreement  is  appended  as  a  specimen.  By  it 
the  master  promised  to  pay  the  laborer's  passage,  to  maintain 
him  during  his  term  of  service,  and  when  that  ended,  to  supply 
him  with  fifty  acres  of  land  and  corn  for  a  year.  The  length  of 
term  was  left  optional,  but  five  years  was  recommended.  It  is 
clear  from  this  that  the  system  on  which  Maryland  was  settled 
was,  in  some  measure,  that  familiar  to  the  ancient  world  and  not 
without  advocates  among  modern  theorists.  It  was  to  be  not  a 
chance  assemblage  of  individuals,  but  a  formed  and  articulated 
body  transplanted  complete,  with  each  person  ready  at  once  to 
fall  into  his  place  and  discharge  the  functions  for  which  he  was 
specially  fitted.  Each  planter  was  intended  to  be  the  patriarchal 
head  of  a  little  community  complete  in  itself.  Our  records  are 
too  scanty  to  tell  us  with  what  degree  of  success  this  theory  was 
carried  out.  Indeed,  we  know  but  little  of  the  early  economical 
history  of  Maryland.  What  little  we  do  know,  however,  indicates 
a  high  degree  of  prosperity.  We  hear  nothing  of  the  trials  which 
usually  beset  a  young  colony  in  that  age,  and  in  spite  of  serious 
political  troubles,  we  find  no  trace  of  material  suffering. 

This  was  no  doubt  in  part  due  to  the  natural  advantages  of 
the  country.  In  these  it  resembled,  but  even  surpassed  Virginia. 
Natural  The  cnrr,ate  was  equally  genial,  but  more  temperate, 
resources.*  'j^q  s0[\  possessed  the  same  resources,  but  there  was 
not,  as  in  Virginia,  a  belt  of  swamps  between  the  sea  and  the 
most  fertile  land.  The  only  drawback  to  the  soil  was  its  exces- 
sive richness,  which  needed  to  be  lessened  by  at  least  one  crop 
of  tobacco  before  the  land  was  fit  for  corn.  In  Maryland,  as  in 
Virginia,  the  tendency  to  grow  tobacco  exclusively  and  to  neg- 

1  The  material  resources  of  the  country  are  described  in  the  above-mentioned  pamphlet, 
by  White,  and  in  the  latter  part  of  Leah  a.7id  Rachel. 


WAR  WITH  THE  INDIANS. 


301 


lect  other  crops  had  to  be  checked  by  special  enactments.  A 
law  passed  in  1638  provided  that  every  one  cultivating  tobacco 
should  also  grow  two  acres  of  corn.  Tobacco,  too,  as  in  the 
neighboring  colony,  became  at  an  early  date  the  current  medium. 
Still,  it  is  clear  that  the  cultivation  of  this  crop  did  not  monopo- 
lize labor,  since  the  settlers  were  able  to  export  corn  to  their 
northern  neighbors,  the  Swedes  on  the  Delaware,  the  Dutch  of 
New  Netherlands,  and  the  New  England  Puritans.1  It  is  true 
that  this  supply  was  in  part  obtained  by  trade  with  the  Indians, 
but  no  community  is  likely  to  export  the  necessaries  of  life  till  its 
own  needs  have  been  fully  satisfied. 

In  their  dealings  with  the  Indians,  the  settlers  in  Maryland 
were  more  fortunate  than  their  neighbors.  At  first  it  seemed  as  if 
Relations  the  intercourse  between  the  colonists  and  the  savages 
natives*  was  to  be  one  of  perfect  amity.  The  Indians  received 
the  new-comers  with  open  arms,  aiding  them  in  the  chase,  and 
almost  living  in  the  settlement.  A  current  story,  resting  indeed 
on  no  very  good  foundation,  serves  to  illustrate  the  feelings  with 
which  the  Indians  at  first  regarded  their  new  neighbors.  It  is 
said  that  one  of  the  chiefs,  upon  leaving  St.  Mary's,  thus  ad- 
dressed Calvert :  "I  love  the  English  so  well  that  if  they  should 
go  about  to  kill  me,  if  I  had  so  much  breath  as  to  speak,  I  would 
command  the  people  not  to  revenge  my  death,  for  I  know  they 
would  not  do  such  a  thing  except  it  were  through  my  own 
fault."2 

As  we  have  seen,  the  first  breach  of  this  friendship  was  ascribed 
to  the  intrigues  of  Clayborne.  Yet  in  any  case  it  is  probable  that 
war  the  ineradicable  barbarism  of  the  Indian  would  sooner 

Indians.6  or  later  have  led  to  hostility.  Of  the  early  troubles 
with  the  natives  we  know  little  beyond  the  fact  that  they  occa- 
sionally formed  the  subject  of  discussion  at  the  Assembly.  The 
hostility,  such  as  it  was,  was  marked  by  no  striking  episode  like 
the  Virginian  massacre.  The  only  tribe  who  seem  to  have  caused 
the  Marylanders  any  serious  anxiety  were  the  Susquehannocks. 
In  1641  their  enmity  made  it  necessary  to  give  the  inhabitants 
of  Kent  Island  general  permission  to  carry  on  war  against  them.3 
In  the  next  year  this  permission  was  extended  to  the  other  out- 
lying settlements,4  and  about  the  same  time  some  attempt  seems 

1  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  164.  2  lb.,  vol.  ii.p.  31. 

3  lb.,  vol.  ii.  p.  183.  4  lb.,  vol.  ii.  p.  212. 


3o2  THE  F0  UNDA  TION  OF  MA  R  YLA  ND. 

to  have  been  made  to  arrange  measures  in  concert  with  Virginia.1 
Of  the  details  of  the  war  we  know  nothing.  In  1652  it  was 
ended  by  a  formal  peace.  Boundaries  were  fixed  to  the  English 
territory,  and  a  system  of  tokens  was  arranged  for  all  Indians 
crossing  the  frontier.  The  last  clause  of  the  treaty  rather  oddly 
provided  that  if  either  party  should  at  a  future  time  meditate  hos- 
tilities, they  should  give  their  enemy  twenty  days'  notice  of  their 
purpose,  a  condition  not  very  likely  to  be  fulfilled  by  a  nation 
whose  system  of  war  turned  almost  wholly  on  surprises.2 

Maryland  had  less  to  fear  from  the  savages  than  from  internal 
dissensions.  In  Virginia,  as  we  have  seen,  the  overthrow  of  the 
Outbreak  monarchy  was  accompanied  by  political  changes,  real, 
war.vl  yet  so  mild  in  their  character  that  their  significance 

has  been  usually  underrated.  In  Maryland,  on  the  contrary,  the 
struggle  of  parties  was  attended  with  a  degree  of  violence  dis- 
proportionate to  its  substantial  results. 

It  is  difficult  to  fasten  the  blame  of  the  first  attack  definitely  on 
either  party.  In  1643  or  1644  the  king  gave  letters  of  marque 
to  Leonard  Calvert,  commissioning  him  to  seize  upon  all  ships 
belonging  to  the  Parliament.3  It  would  seem,  however,  as  if  the 
other  side  had  begun  to  be  active,  since  only  three  months  later 
we  find  the  Governor  issuing  a  proclamation  for  the  arrest  of 
Richard  Ingle,  a  sea-captain,  apparently  a  Puritan,  and  an  ally 
of  Clayborne.  The  proclamation  charged  him  with  treason.4 
Of  the  details  of  his  conduct  we  know  nothing,  but  either  the 
attempt  to  arrest  him  failed,  or  he  made  a  speedy  escape,  for  in 
less  than  a  year  he  was  free  and  threatening  the  established  gov- 
ernment in  the  colony.  He  was  commissioned  to  cruise  in  Chesa- 
peake Bay  with  letters  of  marque  against  the  enemies  of  the  Par- 
liament ;  and  a  like  authority  was  extended  to  seven  other  ves- 
sels.5 Ingle,  however,  did  not  confine  himself  to  the  terms  of 
his  commission,  but  renewed  his  attack  on  Maryland.  He  landed 
at  St.  Mary's,  while  Clayborne  at  the  same  time  made  a  fresh 
attempt  upon  Kent  Island.  Later  events  showed  that  under  a 
resolute  leader  the  Maryland  Royalists  were  capable  of  a  de- 
termined resistance,  but  now  either  no  such  leader  was  forth- 

1  Bozman  (vol.  ii.  p.  229)  quotes  a  letter  from  Leonard  Calvert  to  the  Governor  of  Virginia 
on  this  subject. 

*  This  treaty  is  given  in  full  by  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  682. 

8  Virginia  and  Maryland,  p.  11.  Neill,  p.  248.  The  latter  dates  the  commission  Octo- 
ber, 1643,  the  former  1644.     I  cannot  find  the  original  document. 

4  The  proclamation  is  given  in  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  291. 

6  Journals  of  Parliament,  quoted  by  Mr.  Neill,  p.  248. 


OUTBREAK  OF  CIVIL  WAR. 


3°3 


coming,  or  the  party  was  taken  by  surprise.  Cornwallis,  who 
seems  to  have  been  the  most  energetic  man  in  the  colony,  was 
absent  in  England,  and  Leonard  Calvert  fled  into  Virginia,  ap- 
parently without  an  effort  to  maintain  his  authority.  Ingle  and 
his  followers  landed  and  seized  upon  St.  Mary's,  took  possession 
of  the  government,  and  plundered  Cornwallis's  house  and  goods 
to  the  value  of  three  hundred  pounds.1 

Their  success  was  short-lived.  Calvert  returned,  rallied  his 
party,  and  ejected  Clayborne  and  Ingle.  The  Parliament  made 
no  attempt  to  back  the  proceedings  of  its  supporters,  and  the 
matter  dwindled  into  a  petty  dispute  between  Ingle  and  Corn- 
wallis, in  which  the  latter  obtained  at  least  some  redress  for  his 
losses.  The  Isle  of  Kent  held  out  somewhat  longer,  but  in  the 
course  of  the  next  year  it  was  brought  back  to  its  allegiance. 
This  event  was  followed  in  less  than  a  twelvemonth  by  the  death 
of  the  Governor.2 

Baltimore  now  began  to  see  that  in  the  existing  position  of 
parties,  he  must  choose  between  his  fidelity  to  a  fallen  cause,  and 
Baltimore  ms  position  as  the  Proprietor  of  Maryland.  As  early 
thePuries  as  J^42  we  ^n0-  n*m  warning  the  Roman  Catholic 
tans.  priests  in  his  colony  that  they  must  expect  no  privileges 

beyond  those  which  they  would  enjoy  in  England.3  He  now 
showed  his  anxiety  to  propitiate  the  rising  powers  by  his  choice 
of  a  successor  to  his  brother.  The  new  Governor,  William  Stone, 
was  a  Protestant.  The  Council  was  also  reconstituted,  and  only 
two  Papists  appeared  among  its  members.4  At  the  same  time, 
Baltimore  showed  that  Stone's  appointment  was  meant  as  a  com- 
promise and  not  a  surrender,  since  he  specially  excepted  Ingle 
and  his  associate  Durford  from  the  pardon  which  the  Governor 
might  grant.5  Furthermore,  he  exacted  from  Stone  an  oath  that 
he  would  not  molest  any  persons  on  the  ground  of  their  religion, 
provided  they  accepted  the  fundamental  dogmas  of  Christianity.6 
The  Roman  Catholics  were  singled  out  as  the  special  objects  of 
this  protection,  though  we  may  reasonably  suppose  that  it  was 
also  intended  to  check  religious  dissensions. 

So  far  Baltimore  only  acted  like  a  prudent,  unenthusiastic  man, 

1  The  fact  of  Calvert's  retreat  into  Virginia  is  proved  by  a  commission  issued  by  him,  and 
dated  from  that  colony.  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  293.  Most  of  the  documents  relating  to  Ingle's 
proceedings  are^pst.     Mr.  Neill  has  a  short  account  of  the  affair  based  on  existing  MSS. 

2  Neiil  (Eti&ish  Colonization),  p.  251.     Bozman,  vol.  ii.  pp.  296,  303. 

3  Letter  from  Baltimore,  quoted  by  Mr.  Neill,  p.  274. 

4  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  332.  5  lb.,  vol.  ii.  p.  406.  6  lb.,  vol.  ii.  p.  335. 


3°4 


THE  FOUNDATION  OF  MARYLAND. 


who  was  willing  to  make  the  best  of  a  defeat  and  save  what  he 
could  out  of  it,  by  a  seemingly  free  sacrifice  of  what  was  already 
lost.  His  later  policy  showed  that  he  was  prepared  to  go  further 
and  to  retain  safety,  emolument,  and  power  by  sacrifices  which 
would  have  repelled  an  honorable  man. 

The  internal  condition  of  the  colony  had  now  been  substantially 
changed  since  the  failure  of  Ingle  and  Clayborne.  The  Puritan 
immigra-  Party  there  had  received  an  important  addition.  We 
ritansfinto  nave  already  seen  how  a  number  of  Nonconformists 
the  colony,  had  made  an  attempt  to  establish  themselves  on  the 
shores  of  the  Chesapeake  Bay,  and  how  they  had  fared  among 
the  Virginians.  The  toleration  which  was  denied  them  by  the 
rigid  and  narrow-minded  Anglicanism  of  Virginia  was  conceded 
by  the  liberality  or  the  indifference  of  Baltimore.  The  precise 
date  and  manner  of  their  immigration  cannot  be  discovered,  but 
we  know  that  by  1650  their  settlement  was  important  enough  to 
be  made  into  a  separate  county  under  the  name  of  Ann  Arundel,1 
and  by  1653  they  formed  two  distinct  communities,  numbering 
between  them  close  upon  a  hundred  and  forty  householders.2 
All  that  was  required  of  them  was  an  oath  of  fidelity  to  the  Pro- 
prietor, and  it  seems  doubtful  whether  even  that  was  exacted  at 
the  outset.3  They  seem,  in  the  unsettled  and  anarchical  condi- 
tion of  the  colony,  to  have  been  allowed  to  form  a  separate  and 
well-nigh  independent  body,  holding  political  views  openly  at 
variance  with  those  of  the  Proprietor. 

To  what  extent  the  settlers  on  the  Isle  of  Kent  were  avowedly 
hostile  to  Baltimore's  government  is  doubtful.  But  it  is  clear  that 
discontent  was  rife  among  them,  and  that  in  conjunction  with  the 
new-comers,  they  made  up  a  formidable  body,  prepared  to  oppose 
the  Proprietor  and  support  the  Parliament. 

Symptoms  of  internal  disaffection  were  seen  in  the  proceedings 
of  the  Assembly  of  1649.  The  battle-ground  was  the  old  one, 
Disputes  the  right  of  the  Proprietor  to  originate  laws.  Baltimore 
Assembly,  sent  out  a  body  of  Acts  seemingly  unobjectionable  in 
themselves,  and  in  substance  acceptable  to  the  colonists.  Never- 
theless the  Assembly  rejected  them  and  accompanied  the»rejec- 

1  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  393. 

2  This  is  proved  by  two  petitions  still  extant,  the  one  signed  by  seventy-eight  householders, 
resident  in  Ann  Arundel  County,  the  other  by  sixty-one,  resident  on  Patuxent  River.  Both 
are  addressed  to  Bennet  and  Clayborne,  and  are  drawn  up  in  a  violent  spirit  of  anti-Roman- 
ist partisanship.  They  are  incorporated  in  the  pamphlet  above  referred  to,  Virginia  and 
Maryland,  or  the  Lord  Baltimore's  printed  Case  uncased  and  answered.     Force,  vol  ii. 

*  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  371. 


LA  W  CONCERNING  RELIGION.  305 

tion  with  a  remonstrance.  This  was  a  somewhat  vague  and  dis- 
cursive document.  It  dwelt  on  certain  unconstitutional  points  in 
the  conduct  of  Hill,  Calvert's  deputy  during  the  time  of  Ingle's 
rebellion,  and  protested  against  the  exorbitant  demands  made  by 
the  Proprietor  for  damage  then  done  to  his  estate.  In  conclusion 
it  besought  Baltimore  to  send  out  "  no  more  such  bodies  of  laws, 
which  serve  to  little  other  end  than  to  fill  our  heads  with  sus- 
picions, jealousies,  and  dislikes  of  that  which  verily  we  understand 
not,"  but  rather  "  some  short  heads  of  what  is  desired."  l  There 
is  nothing  to  show  in  what  spirit  Baltimore  received  this  remon- 
strance. It  seems,  however,  so  far  to  have  had  the  intended  ef- 
fect that  thenceforth  he  refrained  from  any  attempt  to  interfere 
with  the  legislative  powers  of  the  Assembly,  and  confined  himself 
to  his  rights  of  approval  and  veto. 

In  return,  the  Assembly  in  the  next  year  passed  a  body  of  laws 
coinciding  in  many  points  with  those  which  had  originated  with 
Law  the  Proprietor.     One  of  these  was  sufficiently  important 

reiigk>n.mg  and  characteristic  to  deserve  special  notice.2  On  the 
one  hand  it  imposed  certain  definite  restraints  on  freedom  of 
speech.  To  deny  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  was  a  capital  crime. 
To  blaspheme  the  Virgin  or  the  Saints  was  punishable  with  fine 
and  whipping,  and  in  case  of  obstinate  offenders  with  banishment. 
To  call  a  person  by  any  opprobrious  term  descriptive  of  his  creed 
was  an  offense  likewise  punishable  by  fine  and  whipping.  Finally, 
in  apparent  defiance  of  the  spirit  just  shown,  a  general  clause  gave 
full  toleration  to  all  Christians  of  whatever  denomination.,  It  is 
easy  to  point  out  how  such  an  Act  fell  short  of  an  ideal  standard 
of  religious  liberty.  Practically  we  may  be  sure  that  it  did  at 
least  as  much  for  the  protection  of  conscience  as  could  have  been 
achieved  at  that  day  by  the  most  elaborately  philosophical  legis- 
lation. To  have  attempted  openly  and  professedly  to  protect  the 
avowed  unbeliever  would  have  exposed  the  whole  system  to 
failure. 

When  the  Parliamentary  Commissioners  had  completed  the 
subjugation  of  Virginia  they  turned  their  attention  to  Maryland, 
surrender    As  mio-nt  have  been  foreseen,  with  a  lukewarm  and 

of  the  &  ' 

colony  to  temporizing  Proprietor  and  a  strong  Puritan  party,-  they 
mentary       had  an  easy  task.     There  does  not  seem  to  have  been 

Commis-  .  .  _ 

sioners.       even  as  much  attempt  at  resistance  as  in  the  case  of 

1  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  pp.  340,  367.     The  remonstrance  is  given  in  extenso,  p.  665. 

2  The  Act  is  given  in  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  661. 

•  20 


306  THE  FOUND  A  TION  OF  MAR  YLAND. 

Virginia.  In  March,  1652,  the  Commissioners  landed  and  re- 
quired from  the  Governor  a  promise  that  he  would  accept  the 
authority  of  the  Commonwealth,  reserving  Baltimore's  just  rights. 
Their  only  definite  demands  were  that  all  the  inhabitants  should 
take  the  engagement  to  the  Commonwealth  and  that  all  legal 
processes  should  run  in  the  name  of  the  Keepers  of  the  Liberties 
of  England,  the  established  successors  by  Act  of  Parliament  to 
the  constitutional  functions  of  the  crown..  The  first  demand  was 
readily  conceded,  even,  as  it  would  seem,  by  Baltimore's  chief 
supporters.  The  second  gave  more  trouble.  Stone  for  a  while 
resisted  and  was  deprived,  by  force,  as  was  afterwards  alleged,  of 
his  commission.  After  an  interval,  however,  he  seems  to  have 
thought  better  of  his  refusal,  and  was  content  to  retain  his  com- 
mission by  acquiescing  in  the  obnoxious  clause.1 

Thus  the  surrender  of  Maryland  was  effected  with  even  less  of 
struggle  and  change  than  in  Virginia.  Yet  it  might  have  been 
easily  foreseen  that  the  settlement  of  Maryland  was  less  stable 
and  less  likely  to  be  final  than  that  of  the  neighboring  colony. 
The  surrender  of  Virginia  was,  in  truth,  an  agreement  rather  than 
a  compromise.  It  got  rid,  without  the  need  of  drastic  measures, 
of  those'  elements  in  the  province  which  might  at  a  later  time 
have  begotten  enmity.  In  Maryland  the  causes  of  dissension 
were  merely  skinned  over,  and  the  attitude  of  the  defeated  party 
was  not  one  of  loyal  acquiescence,  but  of  secret  and  watchful 
hostility. 

The  year  which  followed  the  reduction  saw  the  colonists  en- 
gaged in  negotiations  with  the  Susquehannocks  and  in  petty  hos- 
Troubies  tilities  with  the  Indians  on  their  eastern  boundary,  the 
Nanticock  Nanticocks.  The  peace  with  the  Susquehannocks  has 
Indians.  been  already  described.  The  Nanticocks  were  equal 
in  numbers  and  importance  to  the  Susquehannocks  and  were  re- 
cently strengthened  by  a  supply  of  arms  and  ammunition  taken 
from  a  Dutch  vessel.  The  intended  campaign  against  them  came 
to  nothing,  yet  there  were  features  in  the  preparations  for  it  im- 
portant enough  to  deserve  notice.  The  levy  was  not  confined  to 
the  districts  menaced,  but  extended  to  the  whole  colony.  One 
man  in  every  seven  was  to  be  pressed  by  choice  of  the  sheriff. 
The  remaining  six  were  to  furnish  the  one  selected  with  the  need- 
ful supply  of  arms,  ammunition,  and  food.  Either,  however,  the 
rumor  of  these  preparations  was  sufficient  to  restrain  the  inroads 

1  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  pp.  439"43>  447« 


ATTEMPT  AT  A  COUNTER-REVOLUTION.  307 

of  the  Nanticocks,  or  the  inclemency  of  the  winter  forbade  any 
operations.1 

In  1654  Baltimore  seems  to  have  thought  that  matters  were 
ripe  for  a  counter-revolution.  The  position  which  he  took  up 
stone's  was  we^  chosen.  He  did  not  propose  formally  to 
attempt  at    Weaken  the  authority  of  the  Commonwealth  or  of  its 

a  counter-  J 

revolution,  representatives,  but  merely  to  reassert  for  himself  that 
position  which  he  had  held  towards  the  crown.  His  original 
patent  made  him  virtually  an  independent  sovereign.  To  re- 
cover that  position  he  had  only  to  maintain  that  the  Common- 
wealth had  succeeded  to  the  relations  and  rights  of  the  crown 
unchanged. 

Accordingly  Stone  by  the  instructions  of  Baltimore  issued  two 
proclamations.  The  first  required  that  all  landholders  should,  if 
they  had  not  already  done  so,  obtain  their  patents  in  due  form 
from  the  Lord  Proprietor  and  take  an  oath  of  fidelity  to  him. 
The  other  ordered  that  all  writs  should  run  in  the  Proprietor's 
name,  and  thus  reversed  the  very  condition  on  which  Stone  had 
been  permitted  to  retain  office.2 

Technically,  no  doubt,  Baltimore's  position  was  a  strong  one. 
Nothing  had  been  brought  home  to  him  which  justified  a  re- 
sumption of  his  chartered  rights,  and  his  present  claim  in  no  way 
went  beyond  those  rights.  Yet  he  can  hardly  have  expected 
that  a  colony  now  largely  peopled  by  Puritans,  and  placed  under 
the  recently-established  authority  of  the  Parliamentary  Commis- 
sioners, would  quietly  submit  to  the  sovereignty  of  a  Papist  and 
court  favorite.  Even  that  very  part  of  the  Proprietor's  claim 
which  to  us  would  seem  most  equitable  and  moderate,  would  be 
in  the  eyes  of  his  Puritan  subjects  an  abomination.  The  oath  of 
allegiance  to  the  Proprietor  bound  those  who  took  it  to  molest 
no  man  for  his  religion,  especially  no  Roman  Catholic.  Was  it 
likely  that  Puritans,  flushed  with  recent  victory,  would  be  con- 
tent with  mutual  toleration  ?  To  accept  such  a  compromise  was, 
in  their  own  words,  "to  countenance  and  uphold  Antichrist."3 

These  pretensions  of  the  Proprietor  were,  however,  somewhat 
furthered  by  the  current  of  events  in  England.  Early  in  1654 
the  colonists  learned  that  England  was  under  the  rule  of  aXord 
Protector.  In  May  Stone  issued  a  proclamation  formally  an- 
nouncing and  declaring  the  attitude  of  the  Proprietor  and  the 

1  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  pp.  455-60.  2  lb. ,  vol.  ii.  pp.  475-7- 

3  Strong's  Babylon's  Fall,  quoted  by  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  403. 


308  THE  FOUNDATION  OF  MARYLAND. 

colony  to  the  new  power.1  The  position  was  chosen  with  singu- 
lar skill.  The  proclamation  set  forth  that  the  government  of 
Maryland,  under  the  Lord  Proprietor,  according  to  his  patent, 
was  subordinate  unto  and  dependent 'upon  the  aforesaid  govern- 
ment of  the  Commonwealth  of  England.  It  is  clear  that  this 
acknowledgment  had  a  twofold  object :  firstly,  to  divest  the  col- 
ony of  the  authority  of  the  Commissioners  by  pointing  out  that 
the  source  of  that  authority  was  now  extinct ;  secondly,  to  con- 
nect the  rights  of  the  Lord  Proprietor  with  the  newly-established 
power  of  the  Protector.  The  Proprietor  abandoned  any  nominal 
claim  to  absolute  sovereignty,  while  he  secured  the  substantial 
benefits  of  his  position.  In  the  same  spirit  Stone  coupled  this 
nominal  admission  of  allegiance  with  a  virtual  assertion  of  sover- 
eignty by  issuing  a  general  pardon  for  all  offenses,  saving  mur- 
der, treason,  and  all  rebellion  or  conspiracy  against  the  authority 
of  the  Proprietor.2  At  the  same  time  Baltimore  proved  that  the 
resumption  of  the  Proprietor's  authority  was  more  than  a  mere 
form,  by  displacing  one  Brook,  a  Councilor  who  had  taken  a 
leading  part  in  supporting  Bennet  and  Clayborne.3 

The  position  of  the  Commissioners  was  a  difficult  one.  The 
authority  under  which  they  acted,  that  of  the  Keepers  of  the  Lib- 
erties of  England,  had  expired.  In  dealing  with  an  astute  and 
lawyerlike  opponent  such  as  Baltimore,  it  was  most  needful  that 
there  should  be  no  technical  flaw  in  their  case.  Yet  were  they 
quietly  to  look  on  while  Maryland  was  converted  into  a  strong- 
hold of  royalism,  and  it  might  be  of  Papacy?  Moreover,  it 
might  reasonably  be  contended  that  the  previous  commission  was 
good  till  formally  revoked,  and  that  Stone's  breach  of  an  express 
.agreement  in  altering  the  form  of  writs  justified  his  removal. 

The  Commissioners  had  the  advantage  of  being  able  to  rely 
not  only  on  the  Puritans  of  Maryland,  but  also  on  extraneous 
Resump-  help  from  Virginia.  With  a  force  of  militia  from  that 
authority  colony  the  Commissioners  marched  into  Maryland  and 
comrnis-  reassumed  possession  of  the  government,  deposing  Stone 
sioners.  anc[  reconstituting  the  Council.4  The  governorship 
itself  was  put  in  commission.  The  new  government  now  pro- 
ceeded to  deal  with  its  opponents  in  a  far  more  severe  fashion 
than  before.  Its  first  step  was  to  disfranchise  all  Roman  Catho- 
lics.    An  Assembly  was  then  elected  on  that  basis.      Its  Puritan 

1  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  497.  2  lb.,  vol.  ii.  p.  498.  8  lb.,  vol.  ii.  p.  499. 

&  The  proceedings  of  this  Assembly  are  recorded  in  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  503. 


SUPREMACY  OF  THE  COMMISSIONERS.  309 

character  was  plainly  shown  by  an  enactment  withholding  all 
special  protection  from  Papists,  and  thereby  subjecting  them  to 
all  the  penalties  of  the  English  common  law,  and  also  by  various 
stringent  measures  on  behalf  of  morality  and  religion.  One  Act 
of  this  Assembly  is  important  enough  to  deserve  special  notice. 
It  declared  that  all  those  who  had  transported  themselves  or  others 
into  the  colony  had  thereby  acquired  a  title  to  land  in  virtue  of 
their  transportation  without  the  necessity  of  making  any  declara-  ( 
tion  of  loyalty  to  the  Proprietor.  In  other  words,  the  Assembly 
adopted  Baltimore's  system  of  land  tenure,  but  divested  it  of  any 
personal  connection  with  the  Proprietor.  This  was  a  step  of  j 
great  importance.  Hitherto  interference  had  limited  itself  to  the 
political  authority  of  the  Proprietor.  Now  for  the  first  time  a 
blow  was  struck  at  his  territorial  and  possessory  rights,  and  the 
whole  aspect  of  the  question  was  changed. 

Lastly,  a  resolution  was  passed  declaring  Baltimore's  demand 
for  an  oath  of  allegiance  to  himself  null  and  void. 

The  menace  to  his  proprietary  rights  seems  to  have  roused 
Baltimore.  We  have  no  direct  evidence  of  his  action  in  the  mat- 
Outbreak  ter,  but  the  common  report  of  the  time  represented  him 
ties°s  1  '  reproaching  Stone  by  letter  for  his  ready  submission, 
and  urging  him  and  others  of  his  party  to  resistance.  The  prac- 
tical result  of  this  was  that  in  the  summer  of  1655  the  two  parties 
were  openly  marshaled  against  one  another  for  civil  war.  St. 
Mary's  county  seems  to  have  adhered  to  the  Proprietor,  while, 
as  might  have  been  expected,  the  new  settlement  of  Ann  Arundel 
was  the  stronghold  of  his  enemies.  Stone  took  the  initiative,  and 
with  fourteen  small  vessels  and  two  hundred  men  set  out  against 
the  Puritan  settlement.  His  enemies  were  unexpectedly  rein- 
forced by  an  English  merchant  vessel,  under  the  command  of  a 
staunch  Puritan,  Roger  Heamans.  He  succeeded  in  blockading 
Stone's  flotilla  in  a  small  creek,  and  compelling  the  assailants  to 
forsake  their  vessels  and  take  to  the  land.  There  they  were  met 
by  an  armed  force  of  a  hundred  and  sixty  Puritans.  In  the  en- 
suing engagement  Stone  and  his  followers  were  hopelessly  routed 
and  nearly  all  taken  prisoners.  Ten  of  the  ringleaders  were  sen- 
tenced to  death,  but  six  of  these,  including  Stone,  were  pardoned. 
The   Parliamentary  Commissioners  have  been  blamed  for  their 

1  The  chief  authorities  on  this  point  besides  Bozman  are  Langford  and  Hammond.  There 
are  also  letters  extant  from  Dr.  Barber,  one  of  Stone's  chief  supporters,  and  from  Stone's  wife. 
These  are  published  in  full  by  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  686. 


3 1  o  THE  FO UNDA  TION  OF  MAR  \ 'LAND. 

severity,  but  they  claimed  to  represent  the  de  facto  government, 
and  it  is  hard  to  see  that  they  went  beyond  their  legitimate  rights 
in  dealing  with  armed  rebels. 

A  whole  year  now  passed  without  any  open  outbreak  from  the 
defeated  party,  though  there  is  reason  to  think  that  Baltimore 
FendaiVs  was  secretly  intriguing  in  the  province  for  the  re-estab- 
intrigues.  lishment  of  his  power.  His  principal  instrument  in 
these  schemes  was  one  Fendall.  He  will  come  before  us  more 
than  once,  and  his  subsequent  conduct  shows  him  either  to  have 
been  a  thorough-paced  traitor  and  intriguer,  or  to  have  had  a 
singular  faculty  for  placing  himself  in  equivocal  positions.  Hith- 
erto he  had  figured  among  the  supporters  of  the  Proprietor,  and 
in  the  defeat  of  Stone's  party  he  had  been  taken  prisoner.  He 
was  not,  however,  thought  formidable  enough  to  be  singled  out 
for  punishment,  and  was  set  at  liberty. 

In  1656  the  Proprietor  seems  to  have  invested  him  with  a 
commission  to  act  as  Governor  of  the  colony.  On  the  strength 
of  this  Fendall  took  some  secret  measures  against  the  authority 
of  the  Commissioners.  The  only  result  was  to  bring  about  his 
own  imprisonment,  from  which  he  was  released  after  a  month, 
upon  promise  of  good  behavior.1  In  spite  of  this  failure,  Balti- 
more soon  reasserted  his  claims  by  dispatching  his  brother,  Philip 
Calvert,  to  the  colony,  with  a  commission  as  Councilor,  and  with 
power  to  act  as  Secretary,  and  to  represent  the  interests  of  the 
Proprietor.2 

In  the  mean  time  the  course  of  events  in  England  was  render- 
ing Baltimore  independent  either  of  force  or  intrigue.  We  have 
Baltimore's  alrea-dy  seen  how  he  had  been  careful  to  propitiate  the 
petition.  Puritans  by  withdrawing  his  countenance  from  the 
Jesuits  within  his  colony.  It  is  clear,  too,  that  the  royalist 
party  were  dissatisfied  with  Baltimore's  conduct,  since  in  1650 
Charles  II.  issued  from  his  exile  at  Breda  a  commission  to  Sir 
William  Davenant  to  act  as  Governor  of  Maryland,  and  assigned 
as  his  reason  for  this  interference  with  proprietary  rights  the  favor 
which  Baltimore  had  shown  to  Puritans.  Two  years  later  Balti- 
more fairly  cut  himself  adrift  from  the  party  which  had  hitherto 
commanded  his  allegiance.  In  August,  1652,  he  published  a 
manifesto  setting  forth  the  various  reasons  against  uniting  Mary- 
land to  Virginia.3     The  document  is  in  every  way  a  remarkable 

1  Bozman,  vol  ii.  p.  534.  2  lb.,  vol.  ii.  p.  545. 

8  Colonial  Papers,  1652,  August. 


PROCEEDINGS  IN  ENGLAND.  3  T  r. 

one.  The  arguments  against  the  crown  are  set  forth  with  con- 
summate ingenuity  and,  it  must  be  said,  with  some  shameless- 
ness.  The  son  of  a  royal  favorite,  he  who  owed  all  his  worldly 
position  to  court  patronage  did  not  shrink  from  pleading  the 
fidelity  of  his  colony  to  the  Commonwealth  and  contrasting  it 
with  the  stubborn  royalism  of  Virginia.  "  It  would  much  reflect 
upon  the  honor  of  the  Parliament  if  he  should  become  a  laughing- 
stock to  his  enemies  for  his  fidelity  to  the  Commonwealth." 
Maryland,  he  went  on  to  urge,  might  serve  in  time  of  trouble  as 
a  refuge  for  the  distressed  Puritans  from  Virginia.  In  the  same 
spirit  he  dwells  on  the  utility  of  each  colony,  while  under  a  sepa- 
rate government,  as  a  check  on  its  neighbor. 

These  arguments  were  coupled  with  others  of  a  more  credit- 
able kind.  Baltimore  represented  the  injury  which  would  be 
inflicted  on  colonial  enterprise  in  future  by  any  curtailment  of  his 
proprietary  rights,  and  he  also  sets  up  an  ingenious  plea  for  pro- 
prietary government,  on  the  ground  that  the  residence  of  the 
Proprietor  in  England  served  as  a  security  for  good  behavior. 

Either  these  representations  or  some  influence  now  unknown 
to  us  bore  fruit.  As  early  as  1654  Cromwell  appears  to  have 
Proceed-  pledged  himself  to  effect  some  settlement  of  the  dis- 
Engiand  putes  between  Virginia  and  Maryland.1  Nothing,  how- 
MarCyiranSf'  ever,  came  of  this,  nor  is  there  any  proof  that  either,  at 
this  or  any  later  stage,  the  Protector  took  a  direct  part  in  deter- 
mining the  questions  at  issue  between  the  two  colonies. 

During  the  next  two  years  we  find  no  trace  of  any  further  ap- 
plication to  the  authorities  in  England.  In  1656  Bennet  and 
Mathews,  acting  on  behalf  of  Virginia,  laid  before  the  Committee 
for  Trade  and  Plantations  a  memorial  concerning  the  relations 
between  the  two  colonies.2  They  still  clung  to  their  favorite  hope 
of  annexing  Maryland  to  Virginia,  and  thus  saving  for  their 
clients  the  territory  unfairly  taken  from  them.  Failing  that,  they 
sought  to  overthrow  the  proprietary  authority  of  Baltimore,  and 
thus  to  free  the  Puritan  settlers  in  Maryland  from  Romanist  con- 
trol. Their  memorial  in  the  first  instance  pointed  out  how  the 
grant  of  Maryland  was  an  intrusion  on  the  rights  of  Virginia.  It 
then  set  forth  that  the  power  entrusted  to  the  Proprietor  was  at 
variance  with  English  constitutional  principles,  and  that  this 
danger  was  increased  by  the  fact  of  Baltimore  being  a  Roman 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1654,  January  4. 

2  Thurloe's  State  Papers,  vol.  v.  p.  482. 


3 1 2  THE  FO  UN  DA  TION  OF  MA  R  YLAND. 

Catholic  and  a  Royalist.  Furthermore,  it  charged  him  with  hav- 
ing instigated  the  revolt  in  Maryland  against  the  authority  of  the 
Commissioners. 

Simultaneously  with  this  proceeding  Baltimore  laid  before  the 
Protector  a  counter-petition.  This  stated  the  misdeeds  and  vio- 
lence of  the  Commissioners  and  their  supporters,  but  seemingly 
made  no  attempt  to  deal  with  the  qu^tion  of  boundaries  or  to 
meet  any  of  the  objections  brought  against  the  constitution  of 
Maryland.  This  petition,  however,  was  favorably  received  and 
was  transmitted  to  Whitelock  and  Widdrington,  two  of  the  Com- 
missioners in  whose  hands  the  authority  of  the  Lord  Chancellor 
was  for  the  time  being  vested.1  Their  report,  together  with  the 
Virginian  memorial,  was  then  laid  before  the  Commissioners  for 
Trade.2 

Neither  the  report  of  the  two  Commissioners  nor  the  judgment 
based  upon  it  is  extant.  But  we  may  safely  assume  that  things 
Agreement  were  taking  a  course  favorable  to  Baltimore,  from  the 
Baltimore  ^act  tnat  Bennet  and  Mathews  were  glad  to  abandon 
Commfs-  t^ie  struggle  and  to  make  an  agreement  which  virtu- 
sioners.  auv  surrendered  all  the  points  for  which  they  had 
striven.     This  agreement  contained  four  articles.3 

The  first  pledged  those  who  were  opposed  to  Baltimore  to 
abandon  all  resistance  and  to  pay  due  submission  and  obedience 
to  the  Proprietor  according  to  his  patent.  In  return  all  disputes 
arising  out  of  the  troubles  in  Maryland  were  to  be  referred  to  the 
Lord  Protector  and  his  Council.  No  lands  were  to  be  forfeited 
for  past  opposition  to  the  Proprietor,  and  all  persons  who  wished 
to  depart  were  to  have  a  whole  year  in  which  to  remove  them- 
selves and  their  effects.  Finally  Baltimore  pledged  himself  never 
to  repeal  the  law  giving  freedom  of  worship  to  all  Christians  of 
whatsoever  denomination. 

Such  was  the  end  of  Baltimore's  struggle  with  the  Virginian 
Puritans.  His  authority  had  been  twice  overthrown,  his  officers 
turned  out  and  his  supporters  routed  in  a  pitched  battle,  the  king 
to  whom  he  owed  his  position  sent  to  the  scaffold,  the  party  to 
which  he  belonged  annihilated ;  yet,  without  force  or  fraud,  with- 
out one  substantial  sacrifice,  by  the  bloodless  arts  of  diplomacy 
he  had  now  won  back  every  position  for  which  he  had  fought. 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1656,  January  22.     The  petition  itself  is  apparently  no  longer  extant 
An  abstract  of  it  exists  in  an  interregnum  Entry  Book,  No.  cl.  p.  433. 

2  lb.,  1656,  July  31. 

8  The  agreement  is  given  fully  by  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  553,  et  seq. 


A  TTA  CK  ON  THE  PROPRIETOR'S  A  UTHORITY.      3  Y 3 

Authority  thus  recovered  was  little  likely  to  be  abused,  and  for 
two  years  Maryland  enjoyed  tranquillity.  This  was  first  broken 
Dispute  be-  by  a  dispute  between  the  Proprietor  and  the  Assembly.1 
Proprietor  This,  however,  does  not  seem  to  have  sprung  out  of 
Assembly,  the  relations  between  Baltimore  and  the  defeated 
party.  It  was  rather  a  revival  of  the  earlier  conflicts  as  to  the 
limits  of  the  Proprietor's  a  thority.  The  Burgesses  put  forward 
a  claim  to  legislative  power,  independent  of  the  Governor  and 
Council.  The  latter  body  naturally  disputed  this  view.  The 
Burgesses  then  contended  that  the  Council  might  sit  with  the 
Lower  House  as  a  single  chamber.  A  more  short-sighted  and 
suicidal  contention  could  hardly  have  been  urged,  since  for  the 
sake  of  a  temporary  victory  it  would  have  enabled  the  Proprietor 
at  a  later  date  to  swamp  the  Assembly  with  his  own  creatures. 
Fendall,  however,  as  Governor,  together  with  his  only  two  Coun- 
cilors, accepted  the  position.  The  Assembly  then  put  forward 
demands  which  were  practically  a  rejection  of  the  Proprietor's 
authority.  It  claimed  independent  legislative  power,  formally 
repealing  all  existing  Acts  and  granting  commissions.  It  also 
published  a  declaration  forbidding  all  persons  within  the  colony 
to  acknowledge  any  authority  save  that  which  issued  from  the 
crown  and  itself.  Fendall,  too,  notified  his  acquiescence  in  this 
position  by  accepting  a  commission  from  the  Assembly. 

Fortunately,  however,  for  the  Proprietor,  his  interests  were  in 
more  trustworthy  hands  than  those  of  Fendall.  Baltimore's 
brother,  Philip  Calvert,  apparently  acting  under  direct  orders 
from  the  Proprietor,  held  a  provincial  court,  and  the  heads  of  the 
opposition  were  tried  as  rebels  by  a  grand  jury,  and  found  guilty. 
All,  however,  were  pardoned,  save  Fendall  and  one  of  the  two 
Councilors ;  they  were  punished  by  a  fine  and  disfranchisement. 

The  details  of  these  proceedings  and  the  motives  of  the  actors 
are  obscure,  nor  are  the  events  themselves  of  much  moment. 
Yet  they  are  of  some  importance  as  marking  the  last  of  those 
struggles  by  which  the  constitution  of  Maryland  was  shaped,  and 
thus  as  forming  a  step  in  that  process  by  which  the  different  col- 
onies were  assimilated  to  the  model  of  the  mother  country.  ^ 

1  The  whole  history  of  this  dispute  is  confused  and  obscure.  Unluckily,  we  have  lost  the 
guidance  of  Bozman.  Our  only  authority  on  the  subject  consists  in  the  various  documents 
given  in  Bacon.     1  have  based  my  account  entirely  on  these. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

THE   REVOLUTION    IN   MARYLAND.1 

The  Restoration  brought  less  change  to  Maryland,  with  its  pe- 
culiar and  almost  independent  constitution,  than  to  any  other  of 
state  of  the  tne  more  important  colonies.  The  position  of  the  Pro- 
theResto"  Prietor  remained  unaltered.  The  nature  of  that  posi- 
ration.  tion  as  estimated  by  Baltimore  himself  is  well  shown  in 
the  commission  issued  by  him  in  1666  appointing  his  son,  Charles 
Calvert,  Governor.2  Baltimore  herein  formally  describes  himself 
as  the  absolute  Lord  and  Proprietor  of  the  Province  of  Mary- 
land. His  assent  is  required  to  give  validity  to  laws.  Of  the 
crown  not  a  word  is  said,  and  the  only  reservation  in  his  sover- 
eignty which  the  Proprietor  acknowledges  is  the  law  passed  in 
1650,  which  forbade  any  interference  with  religion.  But  though 
the  Restoration  brought  about  no  formal  alteration  in  the  consti- 
tution of  Maryland,  yet  the  change  of  system  which  accompanied 
the  Restoration  made  its  influence  felt.  That  event,  as  we  have 
already  seen,  marked  the  beginning  of  a  definite  and  connected 
policy,  which  aimed  at  treating  the  colonies,  not  as  isolated  prov- 
inces to  be  dealt  with  in  a  spirit  of  capricious  favor,  but  as  a  con- 
nected whole  to  be  administered  on  fixed  principles.  The  ex- 
istence of  such  an  anomaly  as  the  independent  sovereignty  of 
Lord  Baltimore  was  a  hinderance  to  such  a  system,  and  every 
step  which  brought  the  colonies  nearer  to  unity  served  to  endan- 
ger his  position. 

This  change,  however,  did  not  begin  to  operate  during  the 
remaining  years  of  Cecilius  Calvert.  The  economical  and  social 
life  of  the  colony  flowed  on  evenly.     In  its  early  days  Maryland 

1  Our  knowledge  of  this  period  of  Maryland  history  is  almost  exclusively  derived  from  the 
Colonial  Papers. 

2  Colonial  Papers,  1666,  February  13. 

3T4 


RELIGIO US  PARTIES.  3 !  r 

had  bidden  fair  to  outstrip  Virginia  in  the  race  of  prosperity. 
The  disturbances  of  the  civil  war  had  turned  the  balance.  The 
life  of  the  Maryland  planter  resembled  that  of  the  Virginian,  but 
on  a  poorer  and  meaner  scale.  In  each  colony  the  yeoman  and 
the  free  peasant  dwindled  under  the  baneful  shade  of  slavery. 
The  abundance  of  rich  soil  and  navigable  rivers  checked  the 
growth  of  towns.  The  so-called  capital,  St.  Mary's,  consisted  of 
some  thirty  houses  straggling  along  the  river  at  intervals  of  three 
hundred  yards.  The  best  house  in  the  colony  would  have  been 
but  a  poor  abode  for  an  English  farmer.1  No  schools  or  manu- 
factures kindled  higher  aspirations  or  satisfied  more  refined  wants 
than  those  of  the  farmer  and  huntsman. 

In  1675  Cecilius  Calvert  died.  His  son  Charles  who  suc- 
ceeded him  was  a  man  of  weaker  nature  and  endowed  with  less 
state  of  statecraft  and  less  tenacity  of  purpose.  Yet  in  him 
parties!8  we  see  something  of  the  same  flexible  and  cautious 
temper,  ever  ready  to  make  the  best  of  defeat,  kindling  no  enthu- 
siasm, but  turning  the  edge  of  hostility.  His  career  as  Proprie- 
tor was  a  troubled  one,  yet  this  was. mainly  due  to  causes  in  which 
his  own  character  and  conduct  had  no  part. 

During  his  lifetime  a  change  went  on  in  the  composition  of  the 
colony  which  had  begun  even  in  his  father's  days.  Maryland, 
founded  by  a  member  of  the  most  aggressive  and  proselytizing 
of  all  creeds,  became,  in  the  latter  half  of  the  seventeenth  century, 
the  one  colony  where  all  sects^seem  to  have  lived  together,  if  not 
in  harmony,  at  least  without  open  and  avowed  discord.  The 
Quaker  there  found  that  security  which  was  denied  him  among 
the  Independents  of  New  England.  The  Puritans  at  Ann 
Arundel  throve  and  increased  in  wealth  and  prosperity,  till  their 
county  became  the  richest  in  the  colony,  and,  what  is  stranger, 
the  most  loyal  to  the  Proprietor.  The  disciples  of  Labadie  came 
from  France  and  lived,  as  it  would  seem,  peaceably  and  soberly 
in  Maryland,  while  cherishing  theories  of  faith  and  morals  as 
dangerous  as  those  of  any  Antinomian.2  There  is  doubtless  much 
that  is  attractive  in  this  spectacle  of  religious  equality  and  mutual 
toleration.  Yet  a  state  which  has  no  common  creed  to  which 
many  of  its  members  belong  and  most  approximate,  lacks  one  of 
the  strongest  bonds  of  citizenship. 

I  These  facts  are  stated  in  a  report  by  Lord  Baltimore.     Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  liii. 
{."An  account  of  the  Labadists  in  Maryland  may  be  found  in  a  paper  by  H.  C.  Murphy  in 
iho  Long  Island  Historical  Collection, 


3 1 6  THE  RE  VOL  UTION  IN  MAR  YLAND. 

So  far  as  Maryland  had  a  state  creed  it  was  a  cause  of  division 
rather  than  of  union.  There  is  nothing  to  show  that  the  third 
Lord  Baltimore  was  a  more  zealous  Papist  than  his  father.  But 
it  is  at  least  clear  that  he  was  in  some  degree  allied  with  the  most 
dangerous  members  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  with  the  unscrupu- 
lous Irish  Papists  who  at  a  later  day  were  the  chosen  instruments 
of  James  II.  in  his  misdeeds. 

There  were  other  reasons  which  might  well  justify  the  Mary- 
landers  in  looking  with  peculiar  suspicion  and  dread  on  the  en- 
croachments of  Popery.  That  motive  was  now  beginning  to 
operate  which  for  more  than  a  century  determined  the  policy  and 
shaped  the  common  destinies  of  our  American  colonies.  France 
had  now  become  a  formidable  neighbor  on  the  northwest  frontier 
of  the  English  settlements.  Her  power,  strengthened  by  the 
sagacious  despotism  of  Richelieu,  and  wielded  by  the  restless 
ambition  of  Lewis,  threatened  to  overwhelm  our  struggling  and 
disunited  colonies.  The  danger  indeed  was  distant,  yet  it  was 
clearly  foreseen.  The  efficiency  of  the  French  missions,  the 
dauntless  heroism  with  which  the  Jesuits  bore  the  gospel  into  the 
Indian  villages,  the  readiness  with  which  both  they  and  the  trad- 
ers and  explorers  of  their  race  adapted  themselves  to  the  wild  life 
of  their  savage  neighbors,  might  well  strike  terror  into  the  Eng- 
lish settlers.  They  seemed  to  be  threatened  by  one  of  the  most 
awful  of  dangers,  the  united  onslaught  of  a  savage  horde  directed 
by  the  intelligence  and  definite  purpose  of  a  civilized  power. 
From  the  great  majority  of  the  colonies  there  was  at  least  the 
certainty  of  united  and  determined  resistance.  Whatever  strides 
Popery  might  make  in  England,  there  was  little  fear  of  any  wa- 
vering among  the  Puritans  of  New  England  or  the  stubborn,  self- 
willed  Protestants  of  Virginia.  The  Dutch  settlers  in  New  York 
and  the  Quakers  of  the  middle  colonies  would  at  worst  be  luke- 
warm. Only  among  the  Romanists  of  Maryland  would  the 
French  find  allies  and  supporters;  if  it  came  to  a  choice  between 
their  loyalty  to  England  and  their  loyalty  to  Rome,  there  could 
be  little  doubt  which  would  carry  the  day.  Moreover,  in  the 
Society  of  Jesus  France  possessed,  ready  to  hand,  a  secret  service 
of  diplomatists  trained  and  organized  to  the  highest  pitch  of  effi- 
ciency. 

In  Maryland,  indeed,  that  order  had  won  no  marked  success. 
In  1670  the  Jesuit  mission  there  only  consisted  of  three  priests 
and  three  lay  helpers,  and  in  the  next  year  it  was  reduced  to  two 


ELEMENTS  OF  DISSENSION.  3!7 

of  each.  Nor  were  the  results  of  their  labors  among  the  Indians 
worthy  to  be  compared  with  those  achieved  by  their  heroic  breth- 
ren who  spread  Christianity  along  the  lakes  and  through  the  forests 
of  Canada.  But  about  1675  there  are  traces  of  increased  activity 
sufficient  to  explain  the  alarm  of  the  Protestant  settlers.1  Thus 
the  conflict  of  the  Exclusion  Bill  and  the  coming  struggle  between 
Papist  and  Protestant  in  the  mother  country  found  a  ready  echo 
in  Maryland.2 

Other  circumstances  served  to  stimulate  this  state  of  division 
and  disaffection  towards  the  Proprietor.  The  resolute  and  not 
other  wholly  unsuccessful  efforts  of  the  Virginians  against  the 

dissension,  tyranny  and  incompetence  of  Berkeley  had  awakened 
a  kindred  spirit  in  their  neighbors.  There  is  indeed  no  proof  of 
any  actual  alliance  or  intended  co-operation  between  the  two 
parties.  But  the  leading  Protestants  in  Maryland  echoed  the 
charges  brought  against  Berkeley  and  the  Proprietor,3  and  his  sup- 
porters retaliated  on  them  with  the  title  of  Baconists.4 

The  colonization  of  Pennsylvania  had  also  a  detrimental  in- 
fluence on  the  position  of  Baltimore.  Boundary  disputes  sprang 
up  in  which  he  was  necessarily  opposed  to  Penn.  This  told 
against  Baltimore  in  more  ways  than  one.  In  the  first  place,  it 
cannot  have  failed  to  alienate  from  him  the  Quaker  settlers  in  his 
own  colony.  Again,  strange  as  it  might  seem,  the  Quaker  Pro- 
prietor of  Pennsylvania  enjoyed  a  higher  degree  of  court  favor 
than  the  Roman  Catholic  Proprietor  of  Maryland.  Moreover, 
the  recklessness  with  which  the  chartered  rights  of  English  cor- 
porations and  cities  had  been  swept  away  showed  how  little 
security  Baltimore's  legal  position  offered  him  in  any  conflict  with 
the  crown. 

There  was  also  now  a  special  clause  of  dispute  which  tended 
to  bring  Baltimore  into  collision  with  the  English  government. 
The  The  Assembly  of  Maryland,  in  167 1,  laid  a  tax  of  two 

Rousby.s     shillings  a  hogshead  on    exported    tobacco.     Of   this 

1  The  history  of  the  Jesuit  mission  is  to  be  found  in  the  reports  appended  to  White's  Nar- 
rative. 

2  There  is  a  long  account  of  one  such  dispute  in  the  Colonial  Papers. 

3  The  Protestant  side  of  the  case  is  well  set  forth  in  a  remarkable  pamphlet  among  the  Co- 
lonial Papers,  evidently  drawn  up  by  a  Maryland  Puritan.  It  is  addressed  to  the  English 
public,  and  specially  appeals  to  the  "magnificent  Lord  Mayor  and  Aldermen."  It  begins 
with  a  narrative  of  the  Virginian  troubles,  in  which  the  corruption  and  greed  of  Berkeley  and 
his  young  wife  are  severely  handled. 

4  Baltimore,  in  a  letter  to  Lord  Anglesey,  calls  Fendall  and  Coode  "  two  rank  Baconists.'* 
Colonial  Papers,  July,  1681. 

6  The  case  of  Rousby  is  very  fully  set  forth  in  the  Colonial  Papers. 


3 1 8  THE  RE  VOL  UTION  IN  MAR  YLAND. 

one-half  was  applied  to  public  expenses,  and  the  other  half  went 
into  the  pocket  of  the  Proprietor.1  The  Act  of  Navigation 
passed  in  1662  had,  amongst  other  clauses,  imposed  a  duty  of  a 
penny  a  pound  on  all  tobacco  exported  from  the  plantations  and 
not  imported  direct  to  England.  The  duty  of  collecting  this  was 
entrusted  to  a  separate  officer,  appointed  l?y  the  crown.  Diffi- 
culties almost  of  necessity  arose  between  this  collector  and 
the  local  authorities,  appointed  by  and  responsible  to  the  Pro- 
prietor. Another  subject  of  conflict  was  the  precise  boundary 
line  which  separated  the  waters  of  Maryland  from  those  of  Vir- 
ginia, a  question  which,  in  the  case  of  shipping  dues,  became  a 
fertile  source  of  dispute. 

In  1 68 1  an  order  of  Council  was  issued  commanding  Baltimore 
to  make  good  two  thousand  five  hundred  pounds  lost  to  the 
crown  through  his  refusal  to  assist  the  tax-collector.  He  was 
furthermore  accused  of  having  illegally  imprisoned  the  tax-col- 
lector to  prevent  his  own  misdeeds  being  reported  to  the  English 
government.  In  the  following  year  the  matter  became  still  more 
serious.  Rousby,  the  king's  tax-collector,  had  made  himself 
specially  obnoxious  to  Baltimore  and  his  adherents  as  a  zealous 
Exclusionist.  His  duties  made  it  necessary  that  he  should  have 
a  conference  with  the  Proprietor's  representative,  and  accordingly 
they  met  on  ship-board. 

If  Baltimore  meditated  no  violence,  his  choice  of  a  spokesman 
was  singularly  unfortunate.  He  was  represented  by  one  Colonel 
George  Talbot,  an  Irish  Papist,  certainly  akin,  if  not  in  blood, 
at  least  in  temper,  to  his  namesake  and  fellow  countryman, 
Tyrconnel.  He  was  well  received  and  hospitably  treated  on 
board.  After  pouring  forth  a  succession  of  drunken  blasphemies 
varied  by  drunken  expressions  of  friendship,  he  broke  into  a 
violent  altercation  with  Rousby,  and  suddenly  pulling  out  a  dag- 
ger wounded  him  mortally.  Talbot  was  at  once  arrested,  and  as 
the  affair  had  happened  in  Virginian  waters,  he  was  sent  off  to 
Jamestown  for  trial.  Before  he  could  be  tried,  he  escaped  from 
prison  and  fled  to  some  outlying  settlements  where  he  remained 
undetected.  The  Governor  of  Virginia  then  brought  the  matter 
before  the  Privy  Council.  Talbot  himself  received  the  royal 
pardon  without,  so  far  as  we  can  see,  any  valid  grounds.  But 
the  severity  with  which  the  Privy  Council  censured  Baltimore, 
and  the  plain  intimations  given  him  that  any  disregard  of  govern- 

1  Bacon. 


THE  RE  VOL  UTION  OF  i68g.  , T  q 

ment  would  imperil  his  charter,  showed  how  insecure  was  his 
position  and  how  little  he  had  to  hope  from  the  favor  of  the 
court. 

In  reality  it  may  well  be  that  the  severity,  or  at  least  the  cold- 
ness, of  the  king  stood  Baltimore  in  good  stead  at  a  later  day.  If 
his  fortunes  had  been  more  closely  bound  up  with  the  house  of 
Stuart,  they  must  have  been  far  more  wholly  overthrown  in  the 
retribution  which  befell  it.  The  proprietary  rights  of  Baltimore 
were  in  part  suspended,  in  part  destroyed,  by  the  revolution  of 
1688.  If  he  had  been  a  prominent  supporter  of  the  fallen  house, 
it  is  scarcely  possible  that  any  portion  of  those  rights  would  have 
been  suffered  to  survive. 

In  1683  Baltimore  left  his  colony  never  to  revisit  it.  His 
presence  had  apparently  acted  as  some  check  on  the  aggressive 
a  revoiu-  designs  of  the  Papists.  During  the  five  years  which 
ened.  re&  "  followed,  the  bitterness  of  religious  and  political  parties 
grew  more  intense,  till  it  was  brought  to  a  head  by  the  state  of 
affairs  in  England.  The  revolution  in  Maryland  followed  a 
course  not  unlike  that  which  it  took  in  the  mother  country.  Dur- 
ing 1688  and  the  early  part  of  1689,  the  revolutionary  party 
remained  quiet.  In  October,  1688,  a  circular  from  James  II. 
warned  the  colonists  of  the  intended  attack  from  Holland. 
From  that  time  forward  no  official  communications  seem  to 
have  passed  between  the  inhabitants  of  Maryland  and  either  the 
de  jure  or  de  facto  government,  until  the  colonists  had  fully  iden- 
tified themselves  with  the  latter. 

Meanwhile  rumors  ran  through  the  colony  of  wholesale  prepa- 
rations for  a  massacre  of  the  Protestants,  of  invasions  concerted 
Outbreak  with  the  French  Jesuits,  and  of  prayers  openly  put  up 
ties°s  '  in  the  churches  for  the  success  of  the  Jacobite  arms  in 
Ireland.  The  Protestants  during  this  time  seem  to  have  been 
quietly  and  successfully  organizing  their  forces.  They  were  fort- 
unate in  their  leader.  Coode  had  been  implicated  thirty  years 
before  in  the  strange  and  abortive  revolution  headed  by  Fendall. 
During  the  interval,  though  no  definite  act  of  treason  was  alleged 
against  him,  he  seems  to  have  incurred  the  name  of  a  plotter  and 
an  agitator.  Yet  his  conduct  in  the  great  crisis  of  the  Revolu- 
tion shows  him  to  have  been  a  man  of  capacity  and  decision, 

1  Our  knowledge  of  these  proceedings  is  mainly  derived  from  the  ex  parte  statements  made 
by  the  persons  concerned.  Each  of  course  assigns  very  different  temper  and  motive  to  the 
actors,  but  in  substance  there  is  little  discrepancy. 


320  THE  RE  VOL  UTION  IN  MAR  YLAND. 

while  the  offenses  with  which  he  is  charged  are  those  which  are 
hardly  to  be  avoided  in  time  of  revolution'. 

In  July,  1689,  the  insurgents  took  up  arms#in  various  parts  of 
the  colony.  Their  principal  force  was  directed  against  the  Pro- 
prietor's official  residence  near  St.  Mary's.  In  his  absence  this 
was  occupied  by  the  Governor,  Colonel  Quarry.  He  surrendered 
at  once,  satisfying  himself  with  a  formal  protest  that  he  yielded 
to  superior  force.  It  is  significant  that  in  this  instance,  as  indeed 
throughout  the  whole  of  the  contest,  the  issue  seems  to  have  been, 
not  between  James  and  William,  but  between  the  Proprietor  and 
his  Protestant  subjects.  The  colonists  seem  with  sound  judg- 
ment to  have  taken  up  the  ground  of  silently  acquiescing  in  the 
Revolution  established  in  England,  as  a  measure  which  bound 
them  without  any  voluntary  act  of  adhesion  on  their  part. 

Throughout  the  whole  colony  the  Revolution  was  effected  with 
the  same  ease  and  completeness  as  at  St.  Mary's.  In  every  county 
save  one  the  Protestants  rose,  and  were  suffered  to  obtain  a  com- 
plete and  unchallenged  victory.  Strange  to  say,  the  single  in- 
stance of  loyalty  to  the  Proprietor  was  in  Ann  Arundel,  formerly 
the  stronghold  of  Puritanism.  No  explanation  of  this  is  given 
in  any  contemporary  documents.  That  county,  we  are  more  than 
once  told,  was  now  the  richest  and  most  important  in  the  colony, 
and  it  is  possible  that  increasing  prosperity  had  dulled  the  edge 
of  religious  zeal  and  predisposed  the  inhabitants  to  a  quiet  ac- 
quiescence in  the  rule  of  the  established  powers. 

In  analogy  to  the  procedure  adopted  in  the  mother  country,  a 
Convention  was  now  elected.  The  defeated  party  loudly  ac- 
Proceed-  cused  the  Revolutionists  of  employing  unfair  influence 
viftorfous6  at  ^e  e^ecti°nJ  and  depriving  their  opponents  of  their 
party.  rights  alike  of  speaking  and  voting.     Yet  a  number  of 

addresses  were  sent  from  the  supporters  of  the  Proprietor  to  the 
English  government,  a  step  which  could  hardly  have  been  car- 
ried out  had  the  victorious  party  really  wished  to  repress  freedom 
of  speech.  Like  its  prototype  in  England,  the  Maryland  Con- 
vention wisely  abstained  from  claiming  any  of  the  formal  powers 
of  a  legislature  beyond  those  which  the  state  of  affairs  made  ab- 
solutely needful.  It  voted  that  the  existing  laws  of  the  province 
should  stand  good  for  three  years.  Its  principal,  apparently  in- 
deed its  only,  important  measure,  was  to  appoint  a  committee  to 
inquire  into  the  truth  of  the  alleged  intrigues  between  the  Mary- 
land Papists  and  the  French  settlers  in  Canada.     No  details  of 


BA  L  TIMOR  E  DEPRI I  'E  D  OF  POLITIC  A  L  A  UTIIORITY.  3  2 1 

their  procedure  are  extant  beyond  a  curt  report,  declaring  that 
the  charges  were  proved.  This  statement,  however,  cannot  be 
looked  on  as  having  much  value,  seeing  that  it  was  drawn  up 
within  less  than  a  fortnight  after  the  appointment  of  the  com- 
mittee. 

The  dispute  now  entered  on  a  new  phase.  Was  the  Proprietor 
to  retain  his  power,  or  was  the  colony  to  pass  under  the  direct 
Baltimore  rule  of  the  crown  ?  From  all  the  counties  two  sets  of 
h?s  pofit-°  addresses  were  sent  in  to  the  English  government, 
ica  aut  or-  piea(jmg  one  forj  one  against,  the  retention  of  the  pro- 
prietary system.  In  every  county,  save  Ann  Arundel,  Baltimore's 
opponents  outnumbered  his  supporters. 

If  the  new  sovereign  had  adopted  the  principles  of  his  prede- 
cessors, there  would  have  been  little  doubt  of  the  result.  Sixty 
years  before,  when  the  Puritan  colonists  had  discussed  the  expe- 
diency of  obtaining  a  charter  from  the  king,  one  of  their  leaders 
had  used  the  pregnant  words :  "  If  there  should  be  a  purpose  or 
desire  to  wrong  them,  though  they  had  a  seal  as  broad  as  the 
house-floor,  it  would  not  serve  the  turn,  for  there  would  be  means 
enough  found  to  recall  or  reverse  it."  The  dissolution  of  the  Vir- 
ginia Company  and  that  attack  on  the  chartered  rights  of  Massa- 
chusetts which  was  only  frustrated  by  the  Revolution,  were  the 
best  comment  on  the  sagacious  words  of  the  Puritan  prophet. 
Looked  at  merely  as  a  matter  of  procedure,  the  conduct  of  Will- 
iam was  fully  as  arbitrary  as  that  of  his  predecessors.  The  de- 
struction of  the  Virginia  Company  and  the  attack  on  Massachu- 
setts observed  the  technical  formalities  of  law.  William  took  the 
government  of  Maryland  into  his  own  hands  by  an  exercise  of  ir- 
responsible power,  in  which  he  was  fortified  only  by  the  opinion 
of  Chief  Justice  Holt  as  to  the  lawfulness  of  the  proceeding.1 
That  opinion,  too,  though  explicit  as  to  the  right  of  the  crown, 
was  certainly  not  explicit  as  to  the  expediency  of  exercising  that 
right.  Yet  here,  as  in  so  many  cases,  the  seemingly  arbitrary 
conduct  of  William  was,  in  truth,  better  and  fairer  than  the  seem- 
ingly lawful  conduct  of  either  James.  The  Virginia  Company 
was  overthrown  with  a  ruthless  disregard  for  the  pecuniary  inter- 
est of  the  members,  and  with  a  disregard  even  more  cruel  for 
those  higher  aims  and  aspirations  which  had  furnished  the  lead- 
ers of  the  Company  with  so  noble  an  incentive  to  action.     The 

1  Holt's  written  opinion  in  the  form  of  a  letter  to  the  Lord  President  of  the  Council  is 
among  the  Colonial  Papers. 


322 


THE  RE  VOL  UTION  IN  MAR  YLAND. 


members  of  it  were  loyal  and  devoted  citizens,  whose  labor  and 
money  had  been  laid  out  for  no  mere  hope  of  personal  gain,  but 
for  objects  with  which  every  true  Englishman  sympathized.  Bal- 
timore had  never  shown  that  his  position  as  Proprietor  had  for 
him  anything  but  a  money  value,  and  in  the  overthrow  of  his 
political  power  his  pecuniary  rights  were  strictly  recognized  and 
respected.  The  .form  of  deprivation  may  have  been,  as  Holt 
evidently  thought,  ill-chosen,  but  no  one  can  doubt  the  substan- 
tial necessity  of  the  measure.  Coode  may  have  been  an  unscru- 
pulous agitator,  his  followers  may  have  represented  a  narrow  and 
repulsive  form  of  fanaticism,  yet  no  one  can  doubt  tjiat  a  Papist 
garrison  planted  in  the  very  heart  of  our  English  settlements 
would  have  been  an  ever-increasing  source  of  danger. 

Even  during  the  course  of  procedure  events  occurred  which 
showed  how  unsatisfactory  was  the  system  which  gave  a  Roman 
Catholic  virtual  sovereignty  over  Protestants,  and  which  pre- 
served an  isolated  and  almost  independent  principality  among  a 
group  of  dependent  colonies.  Tidings  came  from  Maryland  that 
Paine,  the  new  collector,  had  shared  the  fate  of  his  predecessor, 
Rousby.  There  is  nothing  to  show  that  Baltimore  was  even 
as  much  implicated  in  this  as  he  was  in  Talbot's  crime.  The 
murder  had  been  committed  by  certain  disaffected  Marylanders, 
and  had  apparently  risen  out  of  a  private  quarrel.1  Yet  even  so 
it  illustrates  the  unsatisfactory  nature  of  the  extant  system.  At 
the  same  time  there  came  an  address  from  the  Assembly  so  bit- 
ter in  tone  towards  Baltimore,  and  so  laden  with  charges  that  the 
crown  could  hardly,  in  the  face  of  such  a  display  of  feeling,  have 
been  justified  in  maintaining  his  proprietary  rights.2  This  docu- 
ment not  only  brought  up  the  stock  charges  of  intriguing  with  the 
Canadian  Papists  against  the  English  colonies,  but  also  accused 
Baltimore  of  imitating  the  policy  of  the  deposed  king,  by  dis- 
pensing with  statutes,  packing  Assemblies,  imposing  illegal  dues, 
and  interfering  with  the  courts  of  justice.  These  charges  may  have 
been  exaggerated,  and  Baltimore's  absence  from  the  colony  shows 
that  the  guilt,  if  guilt  there  was,  attached  rather  to  his  supporters 
than  to  himself.  But  the  attitude  of  the  Assembly  towards  the 
Proprietor  goes  far  to  justify  the  crown  in  refusing  to  perpetuate 
a  state  of  things  which  could  only  have  led  to  fresh  dissensions. 

1  This  is  stated  in  a  letter  written  by  Coode  to  the  authorities  in  England.  Baltimore's 
partisans  in  their  reply  admit  the  fact,  but  try  to  extenuate  it 

2  This  document  is  copied  in  Entry  Book,  No.  liii. 


DISPUTES  OVER  REVENUE.  323 

The  only  attack  on  Baltimore's  private  rights  came  not  from 
the  crown,  but  from  the  Maryland  colonists.  The  chief  sources 
Dispute  as  °f  tne  proprietary  income  were  three.  Firstly,  there 
prieto/s"°"  were  tlie  clult-rents-  These,  by  an  Act  of  the  Assem- 
revenue.  bly,  passed  in  1 67 1  1  and  confirmed  in  1674,2  were 
made  payable  in  tobacco  at  a  fixed  rate  of  twopence  per  pound. 
Secondly,  by  the  same  Acts,  the  Proprietor  received  one-half  of 
the  duty  on  exported  tobacco.  Over  and  above  this  he  received 
a  port  duty  of  fourteen  pence  per  ton  on  the  cargo  of  all  vessels 
trading  in  the  colony.3  No  attempt  was  made  to  interfere  with 
either  the  quit-rents  or  the  tobacco  duty.  The  Assembly,  how- 
ever, petitioned  that  the  duty  on  imports  should  be  appropriated 
to  them  on  the  plea  that  it  had  been  originally  designed,  not  as 
a  port  duty,  but  as  a  fort  duty,  that  is,  as  an  impost  for  purposes 
of  defense.  This  unscrupulous  attempt  only  brought  upon  them 
a  reproof  from  the  crown.4  The  policy  of  the  king  and  his 
advisers  was  clear  and  definite.  The  rights  of  sovereignty  and 
the  rights  of  proprietorship  were  sharply  separated.  The  former 
were  transferred  from  the  Romanist  Proprietor  to  the  crown,  the 
latter  were  left  complete  and  untouched. 

The  first  act  by  which  the  crown  marked  its  new  authority  was 
the  appointment  of  a  Governor,  Lionel  Copley.  The  whole 
Establish-  policy  of  the  crown  towards  the  colonies  in  the  years 
J£vai°fthe  wrncn  followed  the  Revolution  will  come  before  us  at 
authority.  a  later  stage.  But  we  shall  find  a  more  convenient 
halting  place  if  we  trace  the  slight  and  uneventful  thread  of 
Maryland  history  down  to  the  day  when  the  rights  of  sovereignty 
were  restored  to  the  house  of  Calvert. 

The  Revolution  brought  about  the  same  change  in  Maryland 
which  we  have  marked  of  an  earlier  date  in  Virginia.  It  substi- 
tuted English  officials  bound  by  all  their  interests  and  connections 
to  the  mother  country  for  the  old  type  of  governor  who  was 
a  colonist,  if  not  by  birth,  at  least  by  association  and  feeling. 
The  political  history  of  Maryland  falls  into  the  ordinary  routine 
of  a  colony  under  the  immediate  control  of  the  crown.  Its 
monotony  is  only  varied  here  and  there  by  petty  internal  dissen- 
sions or  small  constitutional  difficulties  with  the  home  authori- 
ties.    One  of  the  most  noteworthy  of  these  occurred  at  the  death 

•  Bacon,  1671,  ch.  xi.  2  lb.,  1674,  ch.  i. 

3  The  financial  position  of  the  Proprietor  is  set  forth  by  Bacon  in  an  appendix  to  the  Act 
of  1671. 

1  The  petition  of  the  Assembly  and  the  answer  are  to  be  found  in  the  Colonial  Papers. 


324  THE  RE  V0L  UTION  IN  MA  R  YLA  ND. 

of  Copley,  and  serves  to  illustrate  the  incompleteness  of  the  new 
system.  At  Copley's  death  two  claimants  for  the  Governorship 
arose.  Blakiston,  the  President  of  the  Council,  a  man  of  some 
importance  in  the  colony,  claimed  the  post  as  standing  next  in 
official  rank,  while  Sir  Thomas  Laurence,  of  whom  nothing  is 
known  save  that  he  was  a  member  of  the  Council,  put  forward  the 
plea  that  Copley  had  bequeathed  the  office  to  him  by  will.  It  is 
scarcely  needful  to  say  that  his  claim  went  unheeded,  and  that 
Blakiston  acted  as  Governor  till  a  regularly  commissioned  suc- 
cessor came  out.1 

Above  the  train  of  insignificant  officials  that  pass  across  the 
stage  during  this  period  of  Maryland  history,  one  robust  figure 
Nicholson  towers  pre-eminent.  In  Maryland,  as  in  every  one  of 
!rno°V"  the  colonies  where  a  long  and  varied  career  led  him, 
Francis  Nicholson  brought  the  activity  and  intelligence  of  a  vig- 
orous temper  and  a  clear  brain.  There,  as  in  Virginia,  we  see 
him  grasping  at  once  the  true  principles  on  which  the  commer- 
cial prosperity  of  the  colony  should  rest,  stirring  up  a  torpid 
community  into  some  zeal  for  education  and  religion,  and  at  the 
same  time  throwing  a  vigilant  and  comprehensive  glance  on  the 
whole  body  of  colonies,  and  missing  no  feature  which  bore  either 
on  their  own  welfare  or  their  utility  to  the  crown.  His  letters 
from  Maryland,  like  those  from  Virginia,  give  an  admirable  pict- 
ure of  the  aspect  in  which  our  colonial  empire  at  that  day  pre- 
sented itself  to  a  vigorous,  clear-headed  official  of  no  specially 
exalted  views  or  aspirations. 

In  Maryland  as  in  Virginia,  Nicholson  was  the  advocate  and 
promoter  of  education.  The  college  of  William  and  Mary  had 
His  indeed  no  rival  on  the  north  side  of  Chesapeake  Bay. 

reforms.  Still,  it  was  something  to  persuade  the  Assembly  to  es- 
tablish and  endow  a  free  school  at  St.  Mary's,  and  to  make  pro- 
visions for  extending  the  system  throughout  the  colony.2 

In  another  of  his  schemes  for  reform  Nicholson  was  less  suc- 
cessful. In  Maryland  as  in  Virginia,  there  had  been  a  constant 
struggle  between  the  natural  tendencies  engendered  by  the 
country  and  the  views  of  those  in  power  as  to  the  welfare  of  the 
settlers.  Just  as  in  Virginia,  the  abundance  of  navigable  rivers 
forbade  the  growth  of  ports  or  towns.  Year  after  year  the  lack 
of  them   was    a    subject  of   complaint  with   the    authorities  at 

1  The  whole  of  this  dispute  is  told  of  in  a  letter  from  Maryland,  September  21,  1693  (Colo~ 
■aiial  Papers). 
'    2  Bacon,  1696,  ch.  xvii. 


A  TTA  CKS  ON  NICHOLSON.  32c 

home  and  the  officials  in  the  colony.  In  1696  an  Act  was  passed 
constituting  Annapolis  a  city  with  a  municipal  government.1  It 
was  easier,  however,  to  constitute  a  city  than  to  wean  the  Mary- 
land settlers  from  their  straggling  habits,  and,  as  in  Virginia,  urban 
life  played  no  part  in  the  development  of  the  colony. 

Another  step  in  the  same  direction  was  taken  in  1706,  when  an 
Act  of  Assembly  was  passed  appointing  wharves  and  ports 
throughout  the  colony,  and  limiting  their  number  to  three  at 
least  in  any  one  county.  This  Act,  however,  and  another  passed  in 
the  next  year,  changing  some  of  its  details,  were  vetoed  by  the 
crown.2 

In  one  respect  Nicholson  was  less  fortunate  in  Maryland  than 
in  Virginia.  In  Virginia  it  is  clear  that  his  activity  and  public 
spirit  won  the  esteem  and  love  of  the  settlers.  In  Maryland,  on 
the  other  hand,  whether  from  a  laxity  of  moral  character  which 
Attacks  on  offended  the  dominant  Puritans,  or  from  his  friendship 
Nicholson.  for  the  Church  of  England,  he  incurred  the  bitter  hos- 
tility of  one  party.  The  attacks  upon  him  are  preserved  in 
memorials  which  assuredly  discredit  no  one  but  their  authors. 
Nicholson  may  have  been  a  man  of  vicious  life  and  at  times 
high-handed  in  his  exercise  of  power.  Indeed  the  school  in 
which  he  had  been  trained  was  one  which  hardly  left  a  possibility 
of  rigid  private  or  public  virtue.  But  the  charges  brought  against 
Nicholson  by  his  opponents  in  Maryland  confute  themselves  by 
their  very  violence.  They  depict  him  wallowing  in  the  foulest 
sensualities,  outdoing  the  shamelessness  of  a  Sedley  or  a  Wharton, 
and  treating  his  subordinates  and  even  his  favorites  with  all  the 
brutal  caprice  of  an  Eastern  despot.  Such,  we  may  be  sure,  was 
not  the  man  who  won  the  friendship  and  esteem  of  Blair,  and 
who  in  every  colony  where  he  held  office  stood  out  as  the  model 
of  an  able  and  well-advised  administrator.3 

Disaffection  towards  their  governor  seems  to  have  been  the 
leading  note  of  the  Maryland  Puritans  during  the  interval  between 
Rumors  the  Revolution  and  the  restoration  of  the  Proprietor. 
itism?°b"  In  addition  to  the  accusations  brought  against  Nichol- 
son's private  character,  we  find  him  charged  with  open  and 
avowed  manifestation  of  Jacobite  sympathies.     That  a  public  of- 

1  Bacon,  1696,  ch.  xxiv.  2  lb.,  1706,  ch.  xiv. 

3  Both  the  private  and  political  attacks  on  Nicholson  are  preserved  in  the  Colonial  Papers. 
One  of  the  charges  is  so  grossly  indecent  that  it  has  been  omitted  in  one  draft,  and  erased, 
thoughimperfectly,  in  another  • 


326 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  MARYLAND. 


ficial  should  have  celebrated  the  birthday  of  the  Pretender  with 
public  rejoicings,  with  a  salvo  of  cannon,  and  with  treasonable 
toasts  drunk  at  his  own  table,  is  a  story  not  to  be  accepted  on 
the  evidence  of  a  few  fanatical  Puritans.  Yet  such  were  the 
charges  sent  home  to  England,  not  only  against  Nicholson,  but 
against  one  of  his  successors,  Harte,  who  held  office  from  17 14 
to  1720. 

The  Protestant  feeling  of  the  colony  showed  itself  more  defi- 
nitely and  practically  than  in  these  old  wives'  tales.  From  the 
Anglican-  Revolution  onward  the  whole  course  of  legislation 
ifshed!ia  "  showed  how  completely  the  once  dominant  Papists 
had  sunk  into  the  position  of  an  insignificant  and  oppressed  mi- 
nority. As  we  have  already  seen,  Anglicanism  was  only  one  of 
a  variety  of  creeds  which  coexisted  in  Maryland  in  a  state  of 
mutual  toleration.  .  If  Baltimore's  report  may  be  believed,  the 
Church  of  England  was  surpassed  in  wealth,  numbers,  and  in- 
fluence by  nearly  all  the  chief  sects  of  Nonconformists.  In  1677 
there  were  only  three  Anglican  clergymen  in  the  whole  colony. 
There  were  but  few  churches  and  no  endowments.  Burial  in 
unconsecrated  ground  was  the  prevailing  practice. 

In  Maryland  as  in  Virginia,  the  reproach  which  rested  on  the 
Church  of  England  was  in  a  great  measure  overcome  by  the  pious 
energy  of  one  man.  Bray,  like  Blair,  was  one  of  those  honest  and 
sagacious  divines  who  in  the  latter  part  of  the  seventeenth  century 
united  the  zeal  and  ecclesiastical  loyalty  of  the  Nonjuror  with  the 
practical  good  sense  of  the  Latitudinarian.  His  earnest  repre- 
sentations as  to  the  neglected  condition  of  the  colonial  churches 
led  to  the  incorporation  and  establishment  of  the  Society  for  the 
Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts.  Another  fruit  of 
his  labors  was  the  collection  in  England  of  books  to  form  parish 
libraries  for  the  use  of  the  colonists.  .  We,  however,  are  chiefly 
concerned  with  his  conduct  in  Maryland  as  Commissary  for  the 
Bishop  of  London.  He  was  appointed  to  that  office  in  1698, 
and  arrived  in  the  colony  in  1*700.  The  Anglican  party  in  the 
colony  just  then  stood  in  special  need  of  assistance  and  advice. 
In  1692  an  Act  had  been  passed  by  the  Assembly  declaring  the 
worship  of  the  Church  of  England  to  be  the  established  form  for 


1  I  have  taken  this  account  of  the  establishment  of  Protestantism,  and  the  disputes  that 
accompanied  it,  from  the  Journals  of  the  Assembly,  which  are  among  the  Colo7iial  Papers  ; 
from  The  History  of  the  Protestant  Church  in  the  United  States,  by  F.  L.  Hawks  ;  and 
from  a  book  entitled  Public  Spirit  Illustrated  in  the  Life  and  Designs  o/T.  Bray,  by  Samuel 
Smith,  LL.D.,  Rector  of  All-Hallows,  London,  published  in  1746. 


RESTORATION  OF  THE  PROPRIETOR.  327 

the  colony.  But  it  does  not  appear  that  any  definite  measures 
were  then  taken  towards  providing  a  maintenance  for  the  clergy. 
To  remedy  this  an  Act  was  passed  in  the  lower  chamber  in  1698 
for  raising  a  church  rate  by  a  duty  on  tobacco.  The  measure 
does  not  seem  to  have  met  with  any  effectual  opposition  either 
from  the  Roman  Catholics  or  the  Dissenters.  It  was  nearly  lost, 
however,  through  the  perverse  and  injudicious  conduct  of  the 
Burgesses.  They  thought  it  a  good  opportunity  for  exacting 
from  the  English  government  a  formal  declaration  of  the  rights 
and  liberties  of  the  colony.  Relying  on  the  anxiety  of  the  crown 
to  see  Protestantism  legally  established  in  a  once  Papist  colony, 
the  Burgesses  tacked  to  this  Act  a  clause  wholly  alien  from  the 
matter  of  the  bill,  declaring  that  the  cojony  should  henceforth  be 
governed  according  to  the  fundamentaflaws  of  England.  Nichol- 
son remonstrated,  and  at  last  arranged  a  compromise  by  which 
the  words  "  laws  and  statutes  "  were  substituted  for  "fundamental 
laws."  '  At  the  same  time  he  warned  the  colonists  that  the  Eng- 
lish government  would  never  assent  to  a  law  which  contained  in 
itself  two  distinct  substantive  enactments  totally  different  from 
one  another  in  kind.  As  Nicholson  foresaw,  the  bill  was  vetoed. 
For  the  next  three  years  repeated  attempts  were  made  to  carry  a 
like  measure,  but  the  crown,  influenced,  it  is  said,  by  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  Maryland  Quakers,  remained  firm,  and  the  veto 
was  continued.  At  length,  in  1700,  the  Assembly,  acting  under 
the  persuasion  of  Bray,  withdrew  the  obnoxious  clause,  and  the 
measure  passed. 

In  1 7 1 5  the  conversion  of  the  fourth  Lord  Baltimore  to  Prot- 
estantism brought  about  the  revival  of  his  proprietary  rights. 
Restora-  The  view  taken  by  the  crown  and  its  advisers  was  that 
Proprietor,  these  were  only  in  abeyance,  and  that  as  soon  as  the 
inabilities  imposed  by  the  Proprietor's  religion  came  to  an  end, 
his  rights  revived.  But  though  the  Proprietor  was  formally  re- 
stored, his  position  was  changed.  The  interval  of  twenty  years 
had  broken  the  spell  of  personal  influence,  nor  was  any  senti- 
ment of  loyalty  likely  to  revive  when  its  object  was  an  obscure 
youth  who  had  never  set  foot  in  the  colony.  His  power  was  no 
longer  supported  by  the  influence  of  the  Jesuits,  nor  his  dignity 
upheld  by  any  memories  of  the  founder,  and  hereafter  Maryland 
shows  but  faint  traces  of  the  peculiar  conditions  of  its  origin. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

THE   TWO    CAROLINAS.1 

That  remarkable  outburst  of  colonizing  energy  which  followed 
the  Restoration  was  not  without  its  effect  on  the  history  of  Vir- 
imeuise  &*n*a  anc*  Maryland.  There,  however,  it  led  to  little 
towards       more  than  an  increase  of  administrative  vigor.     It  had 

coloniza-  .  .  . 

tion  after     more  conspicuous  and  abiding  results  in  the  conquest 

the  Resto-       r.r  __ ,        ,  .  r    _,        ,.  ., 

ration.         of  New  York,  the  settlement  of  Carolina  and  the  ex- 

1  The  material  for  the  early  history  of  Carolina  is  abundant,  yet  hardly  satisfactory.  We 
have  no  contemporary  writer  like  Smith,  nor  even  one  of  the  inferior  authority  of  Beverley. 
The  first  printed  book  on  the  subject  is  called  A  Brief  Description  of  tlie  Province  of  Caro- 
lina, published  in  1666.  This  contains  a  description  of  the  country,  and  a  short  account  of 
the  proceedings  of  the  settlers  in  1664.  This  was  followed  in  1682  by  a  full  account  written 
by  Thomas  Ash,  who  had  been  sent  to  report  on  the  colony  on  behalf  of  the  crown.  We 
have  also  a  confused  and  rambling  history  of  the  colony  up  to  1707,  by  John  Archdale,  an 
ex-Governor. 

All  these,  together  with  other  pamphlets  bearing  on  the  early  history  of  the  colony,  are 
published  in  the  second  volume  of  Carroll's  Historical  Collection  of  South  Carolina,  New 
York,  1836. 

To  make  up  for  the  deficienqy  of  printed  authorities,  the  English  archives  are  unusually* 
rich  in  papers  referring  to  Carolina.     There  are  letters  and  instructions  from  the  Proprietors, 
individually  and  collectively,  and  reports  sent  to  thern  by  successive  governors  and  other  co- 
lonial officials.     It  is  remarkable,  however,  that  while  we  have  such  abundant  material  of  this 
kind,  there  is  a  great  lack  of  records  of  the  actual  proceedings  of  the  local  legislatures  in  North  . 

and  South  Carolina.  In  North  Carolina  we  have  no  formal  record  of  legislative  proceedings  V^  \\* 
during  the  seventeenth  century.  In  South  Carolina  they  are  but  few  and  scanty  till  after  the 
overthrow  of  the  Proprietary  Government.  Moreover,  the  early  archives  of  Carolina,  though 
abundant,  are  necessarily  somewhat  confused.  The  northern  and  southern  colonies,  while 
practically  distinct,  were  under  the  government  of  a  single  corporation,  and  thus  the  docu- 
ments relating  to  each  are  almost  inextricably  mixed  up.  Again,  while  the  Proprietors  were 
the  governing  body,  the  colonies  in  some  measure  came  under  the  supervision  of  the  Lords 
of  Trade  and  Plantations,  and  at  a  later  day  of  the  Board  of  Trade.  Thus  much  which 
concerns  the  colony  is  to  be  found  in  the  Entry  Books  of  the  latter  body,  while  the  proprietary 
documents  themselves  are  to  be  found  partly  among  the  Colonial  Papers,  partly  in  a  special 
department  containing  the  Shaftesbury  Papers. 

The  earliest  printed  records  of  Carolina  that  I  have  been  able  to  discover  are  contained  in 
Cooper's  Laws  of  South  Carolina,  Columbia,  1837.  Even  this  only  gives  the  rides  of  en- 
actments till  1685.  In  North  Carolina  we  have  no  printed  record  of  legislation  under  the 
Proprietary  Government,  except  in  Trott's  Collection,  and  this  only  preserves  those  that  refer 
to  church  matters. 

Turning  to  later  authorities,  we  have  one  of  great  value  in  Mr.  Rivers's  Sketch  of  the  His- 

328 


PROPRIETARY  GRANT  OF  CAROLINA.  -y2g 

tension  of  our  dominion  in  the  West  Indian  Islands.  It  may 
seem,  perhaps,  strange  that  such  an  evil  tree  as  the  reign  of 
Charles  II.  should  have  borne  any  good  fruit.  But  the  political 
and  moral  depravity  of  the  age  must  not  blind  us  to  its  redeem- 
ing features.  The  generation  which  witnessed  the  foundation  of 
the  Royal  Society,  which  led  the  vivid  and  many-sided  life  por- 
trayed by  Pepys,  and  which  furnished  Dryden  with  the  models 
for  Zimri  and  Achitophel,  had  at  least  no  lack  of  activity  and 
power.  The  foreign  policy  of  Cromwell  had  revived  that  national 
spirit  of  enterprise  and  self-reliance  which  had  animated  the  Eliz- 
abethan heroes,  and  which  had  faded  under  the  spiritless  tyranny 
of  Jam^s:  Ever  since  the  downfall  of  the  Virginia  Company  the 
passion  for  colonization  had  slumbered,  save  when  it  was  awak- 
ened by  religious  enthusiasm,  or  when  some  isolated  adventurer 
like  Calvert  renewed  the  traditions  of  an  earlier  generation. 
Now,  however,  the  colonizing  impulse  sprang  up  anew,  almost  as 
fresh  and  vigorous  as  in  the  days  of  the  great  queen.  There 
was  indeed  less  romance  and  less  enthusiasm  about  this  revival. 
The  spirit  of  the  missionary  and  the  crusader  had  a  smaller  share 
in  it,  the  quest_for  gain  aj^realer.  Yet  the  later  movement,  like 
the  earlier,  aimed  at  something  beyond  mere  profit,  and  found 
its  supporters  among  the  greatest  statesmen  and  philosophers  of 
the  age. 

In  March,  1663,  eight  patentees,  among  whom  were  Albe- 
marle, Clarendon,  Ashley,  and  Sir  William  Berkeley,  obtained  a 
The  grant  grant  of  all  the  land  between  the  southern  frontier  of 
of  Carolina.  Virginia  and  the  river  St.  Mathias  in  Florida.1  The 
charter  differed  conspicuously  from  any  similar  instrument  which 
had  preceded  it.  Like  Calvert's  patent,  it  gave  the  Proprietors 
absolute  sovereignty  over  the  territory,  with  only  a  vague  reser- 
vation of  the  rights  of  the  king,  embodied  in  the  clause  that  the 

tory  0/ South  Carolina,  to  the  close  of  the  Proprietary  Government,  Charleston,  1856.  He 
has  done  for  that  colony  what  Mr.  Bozman  did  for  Maryland,  though  in  a  less  diffuse  form. 
He  has  constructed  a  consecutive  narrative  out  of  the  archives  of  the  colony,  without  indeed 
much  attempt  to  incorporate  his  narrative  into  an  artistic  whole.  This,  while  diminishing  the 
value  of  the  book  from  a  literary  point  of  view,  enhances  it  as  a  magazine  of  authentic  facts. 
In  every  case  Mr.  Rivers  has  so  indicated  his  authority  as  to  make  the  task  of  verification 
easy,  and  in  many  instances  he  has  printed  the  original  documents  in  an  appendix. 

Chalmers's  Political  A  finals  of  the  United  Colonies  is  a  valuable  authority  as  preserving 
some  documents  referring  to  Carolina  which  appear  to  be  no  longer  extant.  This  portion  of 
his  work  is  published  in  Carroll's  Collection. 

Williamson's  History  of  North  Carolina,  Philadelphia,  1812,  is  largely  founded  on  origi- 
nal documents,  and  probably,  like  the  works  of  Stith  and  Beverley,  embodies  valuable  local 
traditions. 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1663,  March  24      A  full  abstract  is  given  in  Mr.  Sainsbury's  Calendar* 


330  TJ*£  TWO  CAROLINAS. 

province  and  its  inhabitants  were  to  be  subject  immediately  to 
the  crown  of  England.  In  one  important  matter  the  Proprietors 
were  emancipated  from  the  common  law  of  England.  They 
were  specially  empowered  to  grant  liberty  of  conscience.  In  this 
we  can  perhaps  trace  one  of  the  earliest  symptoms  of  the  at- 
tempted alliance  between  the  court  party  and  the  Nonconform- 
ists. The  Proprietors  were,  furthermore,  invested  with  the  right 
of  making  war,  and  with  all  powers  needful  for.that  purpose,  and. 
they  might  impose  taxes  and  confer  titles  of  honor,  provided  they 
were  such  as  did  not  already  exist  in  England. 

So  far  the  rights  conferred  on  the  Proprietors  were  as  ample  as 
those  given  to  the  founders  of  Maryland.  »  But  there  was  one 
Reserva-      important  difference.     Baltimore's  charter  made  him 

\xZZZtf ^o^r        absolute  as  against  his  subjects.      The  rights  of  self- 

■'    rights.         government  which  the  people  of  Maryland  afterwards 

acquired  were  obtained  by  usage  and  mutual  agreement,  and 

tw*  found  no  place  in  the  original  constitution  of  the  colony.  The 
charter  of.  Carolina  ex^rjressl^proyided  for  assemblies  of  the  free- 
holders, and  only  invested  the  Proprietors  with  temporary  and 

S^ti^t*flconditional  powers  of  legislation. 

sCZ£%*.     Two  years  later  this  charter  was  recast.     The  only  difference 

^^-.in  the  new  instrument  was  that  the  limits  of  the  territory  were  ex- 

g £        tended  and  defined  with  more  precision.1 

The  land  conferred  upon  this  newly-constituted  body  was  not 
unexplored  nor  even  unoccupied  territory.  In  1629  Sir  Robert, 
sir  Robert  afterwards  Chief  Justice,  Heath  had  obtained  a  grant 
grant.  S  from  Charles  I.  of  land  to  the  south  of  Virginia.2  His 
intention  seems  to  have  been  to  break  this  up  by  subletting  it  to 
others,  who  were  to  carry  out  the  practical  details  of  settlement. 
One  portion  was  to  be  occupied  by  a  body  of  French  Protestants.3 
Another  was  granted  to  Vassall,  whose  name  appears  more  than 
once  at  a  later  date  in  the  history  of  Carolina.4  No  settlement, 
however,  was  made.  Heath's  grant  remained  a  dead  letter,  and 
was  formally  revoked  in  favor  of  the  new  patentees.5     All  that 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1665,  June  30. 

2  Heath's  patent  itself  does  not  seem  to  be  extant ;  but  there  are  repeated  references  to  it 
in  the  Colonial  Papers  of  1629  and  1630,  and  also  at  the  time  of  the  later  grant. 

8  There  are  several  documents  extant  referring  to  this  settlement,  including  the  agreements 
between  Heath  and  the  Baron  de  Sance,  who  organized  the  French  settlement,  and  the  regu- 
lations drawn  up  by  the  latter  for  his  colony.     Colonial  Papers,  1630,  March. 

4  Colonial  Papers,  1630,  May. 

5  This  was  done  by  an  order  in  Council,  August  12,  1663.  It  is  among  the  Shaftesbury 
Papers. 


FOUR  DISTINCT  SETTLEMENTS.  33I 

remained  was  the  name  of  Carolina,  which  the  loyal  gratitude  of 
Heath  had  bestowed  on  his  territory.1 

Though  Heath's  patent  had  led  to  no  results,  the  territory 
granted  to  Albemarle  and  his  colleagues  was  not  without  Eng- 
Emigration  nsn  settlers.  The  circumstances  of  its  occupation  show 
other the  tnat  we  are  entermg  on  a  new  phase  of  colonial  history, 
colonies.  m  The  colonizing  power  of  the  mother  country  was  in  a 
measure  exhausted.  The  causes  which  had  set  on  foot  the  great 
movement  for  colonization  early  in  the  century  were  spent, 'and 
the  civil  war,  though  it  may  have  called  out  a  restless  spirit 
of  enterprise,  had,  by  lessening  the  population  and  relieving  civil 
and  religious  grievances,  done  away  with  the  chief  incentives  to 
emigration.  But  as  the  resources  of  the  mother  country  failed, 
the  colonists  themselves  began  to  fill  the  gap.  The  settlements 
in  their  turn  began  to  expand  and  to  throw  out  new  offshoots. 
New  England,  Virginia,  and  Barbadoes  all  began  to  overflow, 
and  each  had  a  share  in  furnishing  the  population  of  Carolina. 

Before  going  further,  it  may  be  well  to  clearly  enumerate  the 
different  settlements  in  the  territory  of  Carolina.         * 
The  various      I.  A  settlement  from  Virginia  on  Albemarle  River, 
within  the    which  became  the  nucleus  of  North  Carolina. 
Carolina.0        II.  A  settlement   from   New    England    near  Cape 
Fear,  which  dispersed  and  was  absorbed  into  No.  I. 
,  III.  A  settlement  from  Barbadoes,  also  near  Cape  Fear. 

IV.  A  settlement  from  England  at  Charlestown.  This  more 
than  once  changed  its  site,  absorbed  No.  III.  in  the  course  of  its 
wanderings,  and  finally  grew  into  South  Carolina.. 

Before  going  into  the  history  of  the  more  successful  attempt 
from  Virginia,  it  may  be  well  to  dispose  of  the  short-lived  and  un- 
The  colony  prosperous  settlement  of  the  New  Englanders.  The 
England"  names  of  its  founders,  and  even  its  precise  date,  are 
unknown.  The  earliest  mention  of  it  in  any  contemporary  docu- 
ment is  in  a  petition  dated  August  i,  1663,  addressed  to  the  Pro- 
prietors by  some  planters  from  Barbadoes  who  wished  to  settle  in 
the  same  neighborhood.  From  this  we  learn  that  the  New  Eng- 
land emigrants  were  then  dissatisfied  with  their  new  abode.,  and 
had  sent  home  reports  disparaging  the  country.2  A  few  scattered 
references  in  the  archives  of  Massachusetts  and  elsewhere  show 
us  the  colony  struggling  and  unprosperous,3  and  a  tradition  lin- 

1  The  name  is  used  in  the  earliest  documents  concerning  Heath's  patent. 

8  Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  xx.  p.  12. 

8  Hutchinson  states  in  a  foot-note  to  his  History  0/  Massachusetts  (vol.  i.  p.  260),  that  a 


332 


THE  TWO  CAROLINA S. 


gered  on  in  Carolina  that  a  quarrel  with  the  Indians,  provoked 
by  the  settlers  themselves,  led  to  their  final  dispersal.1 

The  early  history  of  the  settlement  from  Virginia  is  fuller,  though 
even  here  we  have  nothing  like  a  continuous  record.  The  first 
The  first  authentic  traces  of  emigration  are  connected  with  names 
fronfrants  wmch  recall  the  heroic  and  romantic  age  of  Virginian 
Virginia,  history.  A  son  of  Sir  George  Yeardley  was  perhaps 
the  first  Virginian  who  attempted  to  find  a  home  beyond  the 
southern  boundary  of  his  own  colony.  His  exploits  there  are  re- 
counted in  a  letter  addressed  to  a  surviving  member  of  the  house 
of  Ferrar.  He  depicts  himself  living  alone  among  the  savages, 
and  combining  the  functions  of  a  trader  and  a  missionary  in  a 
manner  more  often  found  among  the  French  settlers  on  the  Can- 
adian lakes  than  on  the  English  frontier.2 

The  path  thus  opened  was  followed  up,  and  more  than  one 
entry  in  the  annals  of  Virginia  tells  us  that  the  government  en- 
Govern-  couraged  adventurers  to  explore  the  lands  to  the  south.3 
'nshedebyab"  There  is  nothing,  however,  to  show  the  precise  date  at 
Berkeley.  which  the  first  body  of  settlers  from  Virginia  established 
themselves  within  the  borders  of  Carolina.  But  it  is  clear  that 
their  earliest  settlement  tallied  nearly  in  time  with  the  grant  to 
Albemarle  and  his  colleagues.  The  first  official  recognition  of 
their  presence  is  a  commission  dating  from  September,  1663, 
which  authorizes  Berkeley  to  appoint  two  Governors,  one  for  the 
settlement  on  the  northeast  of  the  Chowan  River,  the  other  for 
that  to  the  southwest.4  The  name  of  the  river  at  the  same  time  was 
changed  to  Albemarle  in  honor  of  the  senior  Proprietor.  The 
Governors  thus  constituted  were  to  have  the  power  of  appointing 
all  officials  excepting  the  Secretary  and  Surveyor,  and  of  making 
laws  with  the  consent  of  the  freemen. 

This  commission  was  amplified  aud  explained  in  a  set  of  for- 
mal instructions  to  Berkeley  and  in  a  letter  addressed  to  him  by 
the  Proprietors.     They  explain  that  their  motive  for  constituting 

collection  was  made  in  New  England  for  the  distressed  settlers  of  Cape  Fear.  We  shall 
come  across,  another  reference  to  the  destitute  state  of  the  settlement.  There  is  also  a  letter 
from  Vassall,  who  had  a  pecuniary  interest  in  the  colony,  in  which  he  speaks  of  the  loss  of  the 
country.     Colonial  Papers,  1667,  October. 

1  Lawson's  History  0/ North  Carolina,  p.  74. 

2  This  letter  is  given  in  Anderson's  History  0/  the  Colonial  Church,  ed.  1856,  vol.  ii.  p. 
3°9- 

s  Hening,  vol.  i.  pp.  262,  422. 

4  This  commission  and  the  instructions  accompanying  it  are  copied  into  Colonial  Entry 
Book,  No.  xx.  p.  34. 


CONSTITUTION  OF  ALBEMARLE.  333 

two  Governors  is  to  meet  the  wants  of  two  sets  of  colonists  dif- 
fering in  their  religious  views.  The  settlement  is  to  be  laid  out 
in  a  methodical  manner.  Here,  as  afterwards,  we  see  that  the 
Proprietors  of  Carolina  had  learned  wisdom  from  the  errors  of  the 
Virginians.  Berkeley  is  not  to  make  any  attempt  at  forcing  urban 
'life  on  the  settlers.  But  in  order  to  hold  the  colony  together, 
lots  were  to  be  laid  out  on  a  peculiar  and  somewhat  unintelligible 
system.  Each  settler  was  to  have  ten  acres  along  the  river,  so  ar- 
ranged as  to  give  him  about  twenty  yards  of  water  frontage.  The 
rest  of  his  lot  was  to  be  so  far  back  as  to  allow  room  for  a  second 
row  of  ten  acre  lots  behind  the  first.  One  obvious  difficulty  about 
this  is  that  each  planter's  main  holding  would  be  about  a  mile 
and  a  half  from  his  homestead,  nor  is  there  anything  to  show  how 
this  inconvenience  was  to  be  remedied  or  lessened.  In  accord- 
ance with  the  precedent  of  Virginia,  quit- rents  were  to  be  remit- 
ted for  three,  four,  or  five  years,  at  Berkeley's  discretion.  Twenty 
thousand  acres  of  the  best  land  were  to  be  set  apart  for  the  Pro- 
prietors specially  with  a  view  to  vine-growing.  After  he  had 
completed  these  arrangements  Berkeley  was  to  explore  the  coast 
farther  south  and  report  on  its  fitness  for  settlements. 

How  far  Berkeley  carried  out  these  instructions  does  not  ap- 
pear. There  is  indeed  nothing  to  show  that  he  had  any  dealings 
with  the  Southern  colony.  His  one  recorded  act  in  connection  | 
with  the  Northern  colony,  the  appointment  of  a  Governor,  is  in- 
vested with  a  melancholy  interest.  His  choice  fell  on  William 
Drummond,  the  man  whose  tragic  end  formed  so  sad  and  shame- 
ful a  chapter  in  Berkeley's  own  career.1 
*\ ,.  The  next  view  that  we  get  of  the  new  settlement  is  from  a  let- 
ter written  two  years  later  by  Woodward,  the  Proprietor's  sur- 
Further  veyor.2  This  report  is  full  of  instruction.  The  writer 
thegcofony.  points  out  that  if  the  Proprietors  aim  at  drawing  away 
settlers  from  Virginia,  they  must  make  the  conditions  of  land 
tenure  more  favorable,  not,  as  at  present,  more  exacting,  than 
those  of  the  neighboring  colony.  Small  freeholders,  he  points 
out,  have  not  capital  enough  to  advance  an  infant  community. 
That  can  only  be  done  by  attracting  large  landowners.  Nor  is 
it  possible  by  any  enactments  to  concentrate  the  population  in 
towns.  Let  the  trade  of  the  colony  be  definitely  established  in 
certain  ports  and  market  places,  and  towns  will  follow  in  natural 
course. 

1  Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  xx.  p.  22.  2  SJiaftesbnry  Papers,  1665,  June  a. 


334 


THE  TWO  CAROL! NAS. 


After  another  interval  of  two  years  we  find  the  colony  under 
Drummond's  successor,  Stephens.1  The  instructions  sent  to  him 
by  the  Proprietors  seem  to  show  that  the  young  settlement  was 
beginning  to  take  the  forms  and  feel  the  wants  of  an  established 
community.  The  effect  of  these  instructions  was  to  give  the  set- 
tlers a  large  share  of  self-government,  with  a  constitution  in  some 
respects  resembling  that  of  the  parent  colony,  Virginia.  The 
Governor  was  to  appoint  not  more  than  twelve  nor  less  than  six 
Councilors.  The  representative  element  in  the  Assembly  was  for 
the  present  to  consist  of  twelve  deputies,  chosen  by  the  whole 
body  of  freeholders.  This  arrangement,  however,  was  only  con- 
ditional, and  as  soon  as  the  country  was  properly  settled,  there 
were  to  be  two  deputies  chosen  out  of  each  "  denizen,  tribe,  or 
parish."  The  body  thus  formed  was  to  be  entrusted  with  many 
powers  which  might  have  been  more  fitly  granted  to  the  Gov- 
ernor and  Council.  In  fact,  the  Assembly  was  placed  in  some- 
thing like  a  position  of  absolute  sovereignty.  It  was  to  appoint 
public  officers,  to  establish  law  courts,  to  create  territorial  divisions, 
manors,  and  towns,  and  to  take  all  steps  needful  for  the  defense 
of  the  colony.  True  to  the  principle  on  which  they  had  started, 
the  Proprietors  granted  complete  liberty  of  conscience  and  belief, 
subject  only  to  the  condition  that  such  liberty  was  not  used  for 
the  injury  or  disturbance  of  citizens. 

So  far  the  constitutional  history  of  North  Carolina 2  is  fuller 
and  clearer  than  is  usual  with  communities  at  so  early  a  stage  of 
The  history  their  existence.  Now,  however,  we  have  a  sudden 
colony  change.  For  the  next  forty  years  the  annals  of  North 
obscure.  Carolina  become  more  meagre  than  those  of  any  of 
our  American  colonies.  The  reason  is  not  far  to  seek.  Hither- 
to North  Carolina  had  absorbed  all  the  energy  of  the  Proprietors. 
Now  it  sinks  into  insignificance  beside  another  settlement  of 
greater  social  importance  and  commercial  promise.  So  distinct 
were  the  colonies  of  North  and  South  Carolina  that  it  will  be  best 
to  finish  our  survey  of  the  older,  though  less  prosperous,  settle- 
ment before  we  deal  with  its  southern  neighbor. 

The  constitution  embodied  in  Stephens's  instructions  was,  as  we 
have  already  seen,  intended  to  be  merely  provisional.  In  1667 
the  Proprietors,  or  rather  Locke  on  their  behalf,  drew  up  that 
constitution  by  which  their  tenure  of  government  in  Carolina  is 

1  For  Stephens's  commission  and  instructions  see  Entry  Book,  No.  xx. 

2  I  call  it  North  Carolina  by  anticipation  as  the  most  convenient  name.     As  we  shall  see, 
the  expressions  North  and  South  Carolina  did  no.t  come  into  use  till  some  years  later. 


FUNDAMENTAL  CONSTITUTIONS.  33r 

best  known.1  As  a  rule,  the  constitutions  of  our  American  col- 
onies were  distinguished  by  simplicity  and  by  their  definite  and 
The  Funda-  practical  character.  We  find  in  them  no  spirit  of  in- 
ConsStu-  genint;y  or  contrivance,  no  trace  of  any  craving  for  ideal 
tion.  perfection,  hardly  even  an  adequate  respect  for  defi- 

niteness  and  precision.  They  were,  in  fact,  direct  offshoots  from 
the  constitution  of  the  mother  country,  and,  like  the  parent  stock, 
they  had  all  the  characteristics  of  a  system  which  is  the  growth 
of  many  generations,  not  the  handiwork  of  one. 

The  two  Carolinas  formed  in  result  no  exception  to  their  sister 
colonies.  For  all  practical  purposes  Locke's  constitution,  with 
its  elaborate  details  and  minute  provisions,  might  as  well  have 
never  existed.  In  dealing  with  it,  we  are  discussing,  not  an  in- 
tegral portion  of  the  history  of  Carolina,  but  rather  a  peculiar  epi- 
sode in  the  history  of  political  thought. 

The  so-called  Fundamental  Constitutions  of  Carolina,  true  to 
their  name,  aimed  at  being  a  constitution,  not  a  code.  Their, 
provisions  may  be  most  conveniently  considered  under  three 
heads :  political,  territorial,  and  general.  The  first  head  would 
include  that  portion  which  defined  and  arranged  the  relations  of 
the  various  members  of  the  body  politic.  Closely  connected, 
though  not  identical,  with  this  was  an  elaborate  system  of  land 
tenure.  Lastly,  certain  principles  were  laid  down  for  the  regula- 
tion of  religion,  the  administration  of  justice,  public  defense,  and 
the  like. 

The  government  was  to  be  a  territorial  aristocracy,  with  the 
Proprietors  at  its  head.  The  eldest  of  them  was  to  take  rank  as 
Palatine,  with  a  certain  limited  pre-eminence.  At  his  death  this 
rank  was  to  devolve  on  the  Proprietor  next  in  age.  The  whole 
country  was  to  be  divided  into  counties,  each  consisting  of  eight 
seigniories,  eight  baronies,  and  twenty-four  colonies  containing 
twelve  thousand  acres  apiece.  Of  these  the  seigniories  were  to 
pertain  to  the  Proprietors,  the  baronies  to  the  subordinate  nobil- 
ity, the  colonies  to  the  commonalty.  Each  Proprietor  was  to 
hold  one  seigniory  in  every  county.  The  nobility  below  the  Pro- 
prietors was  to  consist  of  landgraves,  one  for  every  county,  hold- 
ing four  baronies  each,  and  caciques,  two  for  every  county,  hold- 
ing two  baronies  each.  These  dignitaries  were  to  be  nominated 
by  the  Proprietors,  four  landgraves  and  eight  caciques  by  the 

1  The  first  draft  of  the  Fundamental  Constitutions  is  printed  in  Carroll,  vol.  ii.  p.  361. 
The  later  modifications  of  them  are  to  be  found  in  the  Shaftesbury  Papers,  under  the  respect- 
ive years  in  which  thev  were  issued. 


336 


THE  TWO  CAROLINA  S. 


Palatinate,  one  landgrave  and  two  caciques  by  each  other  Pro- 
prietor. No  one  might  hold  two  dignities.  Upon  the  extinction 
of  any  member  of  each  order,  his  place  was  to  be  filled  by  the 
senior  member  of  the  order  below.  Up  to  the  year  1710,  either 
of  these  dignities,  with  the  land  pertaining  to  it,  might  be  alien- 
ated. After  that  all  alienation  was  forbidden,  and  rank  and  land 
were  to  descend  exclusively  by  inheritance.  Manors  of  three 
thousand  acres  each  might  be  created  out  of  the  land  set  apart 
for  the  commonalty,  and  these  were  to  be  henceforth  indivisible, 
although  alienable. 

The  executive  and  judicial  power  was  vested  in  the  Proprietors, 
each  of  whom  was  to  be  an  officer  of  state.  The  titles  of  the 
seven  below  the  Palatine  were  to  be  Chancellor,  Chief  Justice, 
Constable,  Admiral,  Treasurer,  High  Steward,  and  Chamberlain, 
with  functions  corresponding  to  their  several  titles.  Each  of 
these  officers  of  state  was  to  be  assisted  by  a  court,  nominated  on 
a  complex  system,  according  to  which  landgraves,  caciques,  and 
commons  were  all  to  be  represented  by  members  of  their  own 
body. 

In  addition  to  these  seven  courts  the  whole  body  of  eight  Pro- 
prietors was  to  sit  under  the  title  of  the  Palatine's  court,  of  which 
four  members  might  act  as  a  quorum,  the  Palatine  himself  being 
one.  This  body  could  summon  parliaments,  pardon  offenses, 
dispose  of  public  money  with  certain  limitations,  and  negative 
all  acts  or  resolutions,  either  of  the  Grand  Council  or  Parliament. 
Any  absentee  or  infant  Proprietor  might  be  represented  by  a  depu- 
ty, whose  powers  were  coextensive  with  those  of  his  principal, 
except  that  he  might  not  confirm  Acts  of  Parliament,  or  nominate 
either  landgraves  or  caciques. 

The  Grand  Council  was  to  consist  of  the  whole  body  of  Pro- 
prietors and  Councilors  from  the  various  courts.  It  was  to  act 
as  a  court  of  appeal,  to  make  peace  or  war,  and  to  have  an  initia- 
tive in  all  legislation. 

The  remaining  legislative  powers  were  vested  in  the  Parliament. 
This  was  to  consist  of  all  the  Proprietors  or  their  deputies,  the 
landgraves,  caciques,  and  the  representatives  of  the  freeholders. 
The  latter  were  to  be  chosen  by  precincts,  of  which  there  were 
to  be  four  in  each  county.  The  qualification  for  voters  was  to  be 
a  freehold  of  fifty  acres,  that  for  members  five  hundred  acres. 
The  whole  body  was  to  sit  as  a  single  chamber,  except  in  one 
special  case.     If  any  Proprietor  or  his  deputy  protested  against 


THE  FUNDAMENTAL  CONSTITUTIONS.  337 

an  Act  as  unconstitutional,  the  House  was  to  be  resolved  into 
four  chambers,  one  of  each  order,  and  if  a  majority  of  any  one 
chamber  sustained  the  protest,  the  measure  was  lost.  The  judi- 
cial power  was  vested  in  the  Chancellor's  court,  and  the  local 
courts,  which  were  to  sit  for  each  county  and  precinct,  under  offi- 
cers appointed  by  the  Palatine's  court,  with  certain  territorial 
qualifications.  A  freehold  of  fifty  acres  was  required  in  the  case 
of  jurymen  as  well  as  of  voters.  In  addition,  lords  of  manors 
were  empowered  to  hold  leet-courts. 

Of  the  general  provisions,  the  most  important  were  those  hav- 
ing reference  to  religion.  A  clause  was  inserted,  contrary,  it  is 
said,  to  the  express  wish  of  Locke,  enacting  that  at  some  future 
time,  when  the  state  of  the  country  permitted,  the  Church  of 
England  should  be  established  by  law.  The  whole  system  of 
religious  legislation  was  what  may  be  called  one  of  modified  in- 
tolerance. Every  church  was  to  enjoy  full  religious  liberty,  on 
condition  that  it  accepted  as  its  general  tenets  the  existence  of  a 
God,  the  duty  of  public  worship,  and  the  necessity  of  some  form 
of  oath.  To  enjoy  the  rights  of  a  church  it  was  necessary  that 
a  community  should  consist  of  at  least  seven  members,  and  any 
adult  not  belonging  to  such  a  body  was  thereby  rendered  incapa- 
ble of  office  and  wholly  deprived  of  benefit  and  protection  from  the 
laws.  It  is  needless  to  dwell  on  the  harshness  of  a  system  which 
denied  all  political  and  civil  rights  to  any  unfortunate  who  could 
not  find  six  others  to  join  with  him  in  terms  of  religious  associa- 
tion. Another  clause  savored  but  little  of  the  philosophic  toler- 
ation which  might  have  been  looked  for  in  Locke,  since  it  enacted 
that  no  person  should  in  any  religious  assembly  speak  irreverently 
or  seditiously  of  the  government,  Governor,  or  state  affairs,  a 
provision  wide  enough  to  cover  any  amount  of  spiritual  tyranny. 
Somewhat  of  the  same  sort  was  the  clause  forbidding  any  re- 
proachful, reviling,  or  abusive  language,  against  the  religion  of 
any  church  or  profession,  as  likely  to  lead  to  a  breach  of  the 
peace.  The  religious  welfare  of  the  slave  was  protected  by  a 
statute,  permitting  him  to  be  a  member  of  a  church.  But  no  at- 
tempt was  made  to  mitigate  the  temporal  evils  of  slavery,  sjnce 
the  law  expressly  gave  every  master  "  power  and  authority  "  over 
his  negro  slaves.  Just  above  the  negro  was  to  be  a  class  called 
leet-men  and  meant,  perhaps,  to  answer  to  the  indented  servants 
of  other  colonies.  They  were  to  be  attached  to  the  soil,  and 
might  not  even  leave  the  plantation  temporarily  without  special 

22 


338 


THE  TWO  CAROLINAS. 


license.  In  one  respect  their  condition  was  to  be  far  worse  than 
that  of  the  indented  servant  in  Virginia  or  Maryland.  He 
worked  out  his  term  of  service  and  became  free.  Not  only  was 
the  leet-man  himself  a  slave,  but  his  descendants  were  to  be  so 
also  "  to  all  generations."  Practically,  this  part  of  the  Constitu- 
tions appears  to  have  been  from  the  outset  a  dead  letter,  and  was 
abandoned  upon  the  last  revision  in  1698. 

At  first  sight  it  might  appear  as  if  the  chief  faults  of  these  in- 
stitutions were  their  complexity  and  cumbrousness.  Elaborate 
Their  they  doubtless  were,  yet  the  minuteness  of  their  details 

character,  tended  rather  to  definiteness  than  complexity.  The 
titles  of  the  nobility,  too,  have  served  to  invest  the  Fundamental 
Constitutions  with  an  air  of  absurdity.  But  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  the  charter  expressly  forbade  the  Proprietors  to  confer 
any  titles  of  honor  already  existing  in  England.  Only  some 
borrowed  or  newly-invented  terms  remained,  and  the  names  of 
landgraves  and  caciques  seem  as  convenient  and  natural  as  any 
others.  The  really  fatal  defect  of  the  system  was  its  lack  of 
elasticity,  its  disregard  for  local  peculiarities  and  variety  of  nat- 
ural conditions,  its  inability  to  meet  unforeseen  forms  of  social  and 
political  growth.  The  Proprietors,  indeed,  so  far  felt  this  that 
they  never  attempted  to  force  the  constitutions  upon  their  colo- 
nists. This  elaborate  system  was  to  wait  till  the  settlement  had 
reached  a  fitting  degree  of  development.  But  meanwhile  the 
colonists  were  moulding  their  habits  of  life  according  to  an  en- 
tirely different  system.  Was  all  their  political  experience  up  to  a 
certain  fixed  period  to  .go  for  nothing,  or  was  it  likely  that  a  com- 
munity would  quietly  submit  to  be  divorced  from  its  past  and  to 
begin  life  afresh  ?  To  frame  a  ready-made  Constitution  is  in  any 
case  a  doubtful  experiment.  It  must  be  a  hopeless  one  in  the  case 
of  a  new  community  with  unknown  conditions  of  life  and  industry. 

It  may  be  as  well,  even  at  the  expense  of  strict  chronological 
order,  to  follow  up  the  fate  of  these  Constitutions.  In  1670, 
Successive  and  twice  in  1682,  they  were  modified.  The  changes 
the  Fumia-  introduced,  however,  were  little  more  than  formal. 
ConsStu-  ^ne  most  imPortant  was  one  which  tended  to  strengthen 
tions.  the  position  of  the   Proprietors.      The  original  draft 

provided  that  all  members  of  the  Grand  Council  might  be  ex- 
pelled for  misdemeanor.  This  was  made  inoperative  as  against 
the  Proprietors  and  their  deputies,  on  the  ground  that  they  had 
an  inherent  and  original  right.      The  order  of  precedence  among 


FINAL  CHANGE  IN  THE  CONSTITUTIONS.  339 

the  state  officials  was  more  precisely  defined.  An  article  of  faith 
professing  a  belief  in  a  future  life  of  happiness  or  misery  was 
added  to  those  hitherto  required  from  every  church. 

Articles  were  also  successively  added  limiting  the  endowment 
of  religion  to  the  Church  of  England,  specifying  the  sources 
from  which  that  endowment  should  be  drawn,  and  providing  that 
no  minister  of  religion  should  hold  any  secular  office. 

None  of  these  alterations  in  any  way  affected  the  substantial 
character  of  the  Constitutions.  But  in  1698  changes  were  intro- 
Last  duced  of  a  far  more  sweeping  nature,  plainly  designed 

i6g8nge  m  to  bring  the  Constitutions  into  unison  with  the  practical 
needs  of  the  colony.  The  meaningless  system  of  leet-men  and 
leet-courts  and  the  seven  proprietary  courts  were  all  swept  away. 
An  attempt  was  made  to  convert  the  landgraves  and  caciques 
into  a  reality  by  a  clause  requiring  from  each  a  certain  property 
qualification  in  land  and  slaves.  The  latter  clause  shows  how 
rapidly  the  circumstances  of  southern  life  begot  and  recognized 
an  aristocracy  built  on  slavery.  Any  landgrave  or  cacique  who 
during  forty  years  failed  to  fulfill  this  condition  thereby  forfeited 
his  estate  and  rank.  At  the  same  time  land  was  made  alienable 
by  will.  But  these  endeavors  to  force  the  Constitution  into  har- 
mony with  the  wants  and  wishes  of  the  colonists  were  labor  in 
vain.  For  thirty  years  Carolina  had  gone  on  without  landgraves 
or  caciques.  The  colonists  had  meanwhile  been  growing  yearly 
in  independence  and  self-reliance.  It  could  not  be  expected 
that  such  a  community  would  suddenly  change  its  whole  national 
life  at  the  bidding  of  men  to  whom  it  was  not  bound  by  any  tie 
of  common  interest  or  sentiment. 

There  is  a  somewhat  grotesque  contrast  between  this  elab- 
orate monument  of  legislative  ingenuity  which  we  have  just  ex- 
Enadt-  amined,  and  the  crude  and  practical  enactments  which 
SaSSi  f°rm  ^e  ^rst  rec0I"ded  specimen  of  independent  law- 
passed,  making  in  North  Carolina.  One,  and  only  one  part  of 
the  Fundamental  Constitutions,  was  put  in  force  at  the  out- 
set. Each  Proprietor  nominated  a  deputy.  The  colony  was 
divided  into  four  precincts,  each  of  which  by  a  temporary 
arrangement  returned  four  members.  The  deputies  and  the 
elected  representatives  apparently  met  together  as  a  single  cham- 
ber. Their  enactments  so  far  as  they  survive  were :  that  no  man 
should  for  the  space  of  five  years  be  sued  for  any  debts  contracted 
out  of  the  colony ;  that  all  settlers  should  for  one  year  be  exempt 


34° 


THE  TWO  CAROLINAS. 


from  taxes ;  and  that  marriages  might  be  legally  contracted  by  a 
simple  declaration  of  mutual  consent  made  in  the  presence  of 
the  Governor.  The  first  of  these  enactments  seemed  almost  in- 
tended, and  the  second  and  third  were  in  no  wise  ill-fitted,  to 
make  the  colony  what  it  in  a  great  measure  became,  an  Alsatia 
for  needy  and  profligate  adventurers.1 

For  the  next  ten  years  the  history  of  North  Carolina  is  a  blank. 
Isolated  by  swampy  and  almost  pathless  forests  alike  from  its 
Condition  northern  and  southern  neighbors,  and  neglected  by  the 
colony.  Proprietors,  who  lavished  all  their  energies  on  their 
more  prosperous  settlement  in  the  south,  North  Carolina  struggled 
on,  depending  mainly  on  its  trade,  often  illicit,  with  New  Eng- 
land. Direct  intercourse  with  the  mother  country  was  checked 
alike  by  the  poverty  of  the  colony  and  the  badness  of  its  harbors. 
So  far  as  any  relations  existed  between  the  Proprietors  and  the 
colonists,  they  were  unfriendly.  The  Proprietors  were  •  naturally 
anxious  to  establish  a  communication  between  Albemarle  and 
their  southern  province.  Some  of  the  leading  colonists,  on  the 
other  hand,  enjoyed  the  exclusive  profits  of  the  trade  with  the 
Indians  who  occupied  the  intermediate  territory,  and  had  no  wish 
to  risk  that  monopoly  by  establishing  a  chain  of  settlements.2 

This  obstinacy  of  the  settlers  and  the  increase  of  smuggling  at 
length  induced  the  Proprietors  to  take  steps  toward  bettering 
The  rebel-  matters.  With  this  view,  in  the  autumn  of  1676  they 
1678.°  appointed  a  Governor,  Eastchurch,  with   express   in- 

structions to  watch  their  commercial  interests.3  What  followed 
is  not  easily  understood.  It  is  not  hard  to  get  a  clear  outline  of 
the  facts.  The  difficulty  lies  in  judging  the  motives  and  charac- 
ters of  the  actors.  We  have  only  for  our  guidance  memorials 
drawn  up  by  partisans  on  each  side.  To  ascertain  the  true  nature 
of  the  matter  is  like  trying  to  spell  out  the  history  of  a  corrupt 
election  from  the  conflicting  statements  of  a  Tory  attorney  and  a 

1  I  have  failed  to  find  the  original  draft  of  these  laws.  They  are  quoted  by  Williamson,  vol 
i.  p.  120,  and  referred  to  by  Chalmers  in  his  Political  Annals  (Carroll,  vol.  ii.  p.  291). 

2  This  is  stated  in  a  document  quoted  by  Chalmers  from  the  Carolina  Papers  (Carroll,  vol. 
ii.  p.  237). 

3  This  and  all  that  follows  as  to  the  rebellion  is  taken  from  documents  quoted  by  Chalmers 
as  above,  and  from  reports  in  the  Entry  Books  for  trade  and  Plantations.  These  documents 
consist  of  a  long  statement  addressed  by  Shaftesbury  to  the  Board  of  Trade  stating  the  whole 
case,  a  report  presented  by  the  Proprietors  to  the  Board  of  Trade,  two  short  reports  dealing 
only  with  the  case  of  Culpepper,  signed  by  six  of  the  Privy  Council,  and  an  ex  parte  state- 
ment on  behalf  of  Miller.  Williamson  also  publishes  in  an  appendix,  vol.  i.  p.  132,  a  justifica- 
tion of  the  rebellion,  signed  by  thirty-four  of  the  insurgents.  I  have  relied  mainly  on  Shaftes- 
iury's  statement  and  the  general  report  of  the  Proprietors. 


CULPEPPER'S  REBELLION.  34I 

Radical  tradesman.  Eastchurch  vanishes  at  once  from  the  scene, 
or,  more  correctly  speaking,  never  appears  on  it.  Instead  of  car- 
rying out  his  instructions,  he  stayed  at  Nevis,  engaged  in  the  suc- 
cessful pursuit  of  an  heiress,  and  transferred  his  functions  in 
Carolina  to  a  deputy.  Miller,  whom  he  chose  for  that  post,  had 
been  already  appointed  collector  of  the  king's  customs  in  North 
Carolina.  That  he  was  drunken  and  violent  seems  to  have  been 
admitted  by  friends  and  enemies  alike.  His  honesty  was  asserted 
by  the  advocates  of  the  Proprietors,  but  denied,  though  in  a 
somewhat  vague  and  confused  way,  by  the  popular  party.  For 
eighteen  months  he  is  said  to  have  abused  his  power  by  interfer- 
ing with  the  constitutional  rights  of  the  Assembly.  It  is  clear, 
too,  that  Miller's  duties  as  collector  of  customs  brought  him  into 
conflict  with  the  local  authorities.  This,  like  the  case  of  Rousby, 
illustrates  the  evil  effect  of  a  double  system  of  revenue.  Another 
source  of  disaffection  arose  out  of  a  dispute  about  the  quit-rents. 
The  original  intention  of  the  Proprietors  had  been  to  levy  a  quit- 
rent  of  a  halfpenny  per  acre.  Berkeley  in  his  eagerness  to  tempt 
settlers  lowered  this  to  a  farthing.  The  Proprietors  apparently 
did  not  wish  to  annul  the  arrangement  made  by  Berkeley,  but  for 
the  future  decided  to  return  to  the  original  rate.  This  seems  to 
have  given  rise  to  a  rumor,  diligently  circulated  by  the  popular 
party,  of  a  general  scheme  for  raising  quit-rents.  In  all  these 
ways  ill  blood  had  been  engendered,  when  the  matter  was  brought 
to  a  climax  by  the  arrival  of  a  ship  from  New  England  under  the 
command  of  a  Captain  Gillam,  who  proceeded  to  sell  arms  to  the 
disaffected  party.  The  authorities  not  unnaturally  took  fright  at 
this  and  arrested  him.  This  was  the  signal  for  an  outbreak.  The 
ringleaders  were  one  Culpepper,  who  had  already  graduated  in 
sedition  in  South  Carolina,  George  Durant,  one  of  those  who  had 
followed  Drummond  from  Virginia,  and  Bird,  the  collector  of 
customs,  who  had  connived  at  the  contraband  trade  with  New 
England,  and  dreaded  detection.  They  imprisoned  seven  of  the 
deputies,  enlisting  the  eighth  on  their  side,  put  Miller  in  irons, 
and  summoned  an  Assembly.  This  body  confirmed  the  authority 
of  the  insurgent  leaders,  and  appointed  Culpepper  collector  of 
the  customs  in  the  place  of  Miller,  transferring  to  him  at  the  same 
time  the  funds  in  Miller's  possession,  amounting  to  over  twelve 
hundred  pounds,  with  a  large  quantity  of  tobacco. 

It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  this  outbreak  was  almost  identical 
in  time  with  Bacon's  rebellion  in  Virginia.     There  is  no  direct 


342  THE  TWO  CAROLINAS. 

proof  of  connection,  but  Bacon's  choice  of  "  Carolina"  for  the 
watchword  of  his  troops  can  scarcely  have  been  a  chance  fancy.1 
Moreover  Drummond,  Bacon's  chief  adviser,  perhaps  one  might 
almost  say  his  political  master,  had  been  among  the  chief  found- 
ers of  North  Carolina,  and  in  his  follower,  Durant,2  we  have  a 
direct  link  between  the  two  insurgent  parties.  Baconist,  we  know, 
was  a  term  of  reproach  with  the  loyal  party  in  Maryland,  and  in 
the  similar,  though  not  united,  action  of  the  three  colonies,  we 
trace  one  of  the  first  faint  symptoms  of  a  common  political  life. 

Miller,  apparently  about  a  year  after  his  imprisonment,  escaped 
and  made  his  way  to  England.  Eastchurch  in  the  mean  time 
had  reached  Virginia.  His  attempts  to  assert  his  authority  were 
frustrated  by  his  death,  which  left  the  rebel  leaders  masters  of  the 
situation.  It  says  something  for  their  forbearance  in  the  hour  of 
triumph  that  they  sent  two  commissioners  to  England,  promising 
full  obedience  to  the  Proprietors,  but  at  the  same  time  insisting 
on  justice  against  Miller.  The  proprietors  seem  throughout  to 
have  shown  a  lack  of  vigor  in  their  dealings  with  Albemarle, 
which  contrasted  strangely  with  the  habitual  energy  of  their  early 
proceedings  in  South  Carolina.  Their  next  step  was  to  send  out 
one  of  their  own  body,  Seth  Sothel.  He  was  as  useless  as  East- 
church,  and  more  unfortunate.  On  his  outward  voyage  he  was 
captured  by  Algerine  pirates.  This  left  the  whole  control  of  af- 
fairs virtually  in  the  hands  of  the  popular  party.  An  Act  of  obliv- 
ion was  passed  by  the  Assembly,  and  the  colony  returned  to  its 
normal  state  of  comparatively  tranquil  anarchy. 

The  expulsion  of  Miller  and  the  usurpation  of  his  office  by 
Culpepper  were  not  only  attacks  on  the  authority  of  the  Proprie- 
tors, but  also  on  the  rights  of  the  crown.  On  this  ground  Cul- 
pepper was  arrested  while  on  ship-board,  under  a  warrant  from 
the  Privy  Council,  and  fried  in  England  for  high  treason.  He 
was  ordered  to  make  restitution  for  the  funds  which  he  had 
seized,3  but  the  influence  of  Shaftesbury  secured  his  acquittal  from 
the  criminal  charge  on  the  ground  that  his  proceedings  only 
amounted  to  a  riot,  and  that  high  treason  was  impossible  in  North 
Carolina,  since  no  settled  government  existed  there.4 

1  Vide  supra,  p.  332. 

8  Durant,  or,  as  he  is  called,  Duren,  is  specially  mentioned  by  a  New  England  writer  as 
one  of  the  leaders  of  the  Virginian  Puritans.'  (Johnson's  Wonder-working  Providence,  book 
iii.  ch.  ii.) 

3  This  is  affirmed  in  Shaftesbury's  statement,  and  in  the  report  of  the  six  Privy  Councilors. 
Whether  Culpepper  ever  did  make  this  restitution  does  not  appear. 

4  Chalmers  in  Carroll,  vol.  ii.  pp.  306,  340 


DEPOSITION  OF  GOVERNOR  SOTHEL.  343 

Two  years  later  Sothel  escaped  from  his  Algerine  prison  and 
reached  North  Carolina.  Of  his  career  there  we  know  but  few 
Deposition  details,  but  he  left  behind  a  vague  tradition  of  extor- 
of  Sothel.  tion  arKj  rapacity,  alike  in  public  and  private  matters. 
The  records  of  the  time  furnish  us  with  a  list  of  his  misdeeds  in 
each  department.  A  letter  addressed  to  him  by  the  Proprietors 
accuses  him  of  unjustly  imprisoning  two  innocent  men,  with 
harshness  which  led  to  the  death  of  one  of  them,  of  arbitrarily 
arresting  one  who  would  have  gone  to  England  to  give  evidence 
against  him,  and  of  seizing  private  property.1  When  instructed 
by  the  Proprietors  to  appoint  a  commission  to  try  persons  accused 
of  disorders,  probably  those  guilty  of  the  attack  on  Miller,  he 
nominated  three  of  the  actual  offenders.2  Another  document 
presents  the  Governor  of  the  colony  in  something  like  the  posi- 
tion of  a  common  sharper,  appropriating  a  parcel  of  lace  and 
money  sent  to  a  woman  in  Carolina  by  her  friends  in  London.3 
At  length,  in  1688,  the  colonists  rose  up  against  him  with  the  in- 
tention of  sending  him  to  England  for  trial.  He  thereupon  peti- 
tioned to  be  tried  on  the  spot  by  the  Assembly.  His  request  was 
granted ;  the  Assembly  deposed  him  from  his  office  and  banished 
him  from  the  colony  for  twelve  months.  The  Proprietors  de- 
murred to  the  form  of  this  procedure,  but  acquiesced  in  the  sub- 
stance of  it,  and  thereby  did  something  to  confirm  that  contempt 
for  government  which  was  one  of  the  leading  characteristics  of 
the  colony.4 

During  the  years  which  followed,  the  efforts  of  the  Proprietors 
to  maintain  any  authority  over  their  northern  province,  or  to  con- 
Connedtion  nect  it  in  any  way  with  their  southern  territory,  were 
North  and  little  more  than  nominal.  For  the  most  part  the  two 
Carolina,  settlements  were  distinguished  by  the  Proprietors  as 
"  our  colony  northeast  of  Cape  Fear,"  and  "  our  colony  south- 
west of  Cape  Fear."  As  early  as  1691  we  find  the  expression 
North  Carolina  once  used.5  ^fter  that  we  do  not  meet  with  it 
till  1696.6  From  that  time  onward  both  expressions  are  used 
with  no  marked  distinction,  sometimes  even  in  the  same  docu- 
ment. At  times  the  Proprietors  seem  to  have  aimed  at  estab- 
lishing a  closer  connection  between  the  two  colonies  by  placing 

1  Rivers,  p.  430. 

2  Letter  from  the  Proprietors,  February,  1684.     The  letter  is  given  by  Mr.  Rivers. 

3  Williamson,  vol.  i.  p.  270. 

4  Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  xxii.  p.  177.  5  lb.,  p.  201. 
6  In  a  letter  from  the  Proprietors  to  Archdale,  September,  1696. 


1       344  THE  rwo  CAROLINA  S. 


ifc 


them  under  a  single  Governor.1  But  in  nearly  all  these  cases 
provision  was  made  for  the  appointment  of  separate  Deputy- 
Governors,  nor  does  there  seem  to  have  been  any  project  for 
uniting  the  two  legislative  bodies. 

In  171 1  North  Carolina  again  emerges  from  obscurity,  and 
here,  as  before,  a  rebellion  is  the  incident  to  which  we  owe  our 
Rebellion  knowledge  of  its  history.  There  is  a  certain  likeness 
of  1711.2  between  this  event  and  the  outbreak  of  thirty  years 
earlier.  Each  was  in  some  measure  brought  about  by  an  acci- 
dental interregnum,  and  each  was  headed  by  a  ringleader  who 
had  already  made  himself  conspicuous  in  South  Carolina,  prob- 
ably a  professional  intriguer  of  the  type  of  Ferguson  or  Good- 
man. The  part  of  Culpepper  was  now  played  by  one  Cary,  who, 
in  spite  of  an  evil  reputation,  had  received  from  Johnson,  the 
titular  Governor  of  the  whole  colony  of  Carolina,  the  appoint- 
ment of  Deputy-Governor  for  the  northern  province.  The  Pro- 
prietors disapproved  of  Cary's  conduct,  apparently  in  financial 
matters,  and  suspended  him.  >  At  the  same  time  they  appointed 
one  Glover  President  of  the  Council  pending  the  arrival  of  Hyde, 
wh6m  they  had  nominated  Deputy- Governor.  Cary,  dreading  a 
scrutiny  of  his  proceedings,  took  up  arms.  His  party  is  some- 
what oddly  described  as,  consisting  of  the  Quakers,  and  "  a  rab- 
ble of  loose  and  profligate  persons."  3  With  their  help  he  at- 
tempted to  turn  out  Glover  and  establish  himself  at  the  head  of 
affairs.  During  the  struggle  Hyde  arrived.  Unluckily,  John- 
son's successor,  Tynte,  from  whom  the  Deputy-Governor  was  to 
have  received  his  commission,  was  dead,  and  Hyde  could  only 
produce  the  Proprietors'  letters  instead  of  a  formal  appointment. 
He  was  then  appointed  President  of  the  Council,  probabjy  as  a 
compromise  till  the  arrival  of  his  full  commission,  and  in  that  ca- 
pacity he  summoned  an  Assembly.  Cary  and  his  party  there- 
upon refused  to  acknowledge  the  authority  of  this  body.  Hyde 
then  arrested  Cary  and  some  of  his  followers,  and  the  Assembly 
proceeded  to  pass  a  number  of  harsh  enactments  against  them. 
At  this  stage  a  character  comes  on  the  scene  who  gave  the  whole 
course  of  affairs  a  turn  widely  different  from  that  which  events 

1  This  was  done  in  the  cases  of  Ludwell  and  Archdale.  The  latter  spent  most  of  his  time 
in  South  Carolina,  but  he  possessed  lands  in  the  northern  colony. 

2  The  archives  of  Carolina  tell  us  little  about  this  rebellion.  Fortunately  the  want  is  sup- 
plemented by  the  very  full  dispatches  of  Spotswood,  the  Governor  of  Virginia.  We  have 
also  two  letters  from  Hyde,  written  in  August,  1711. 

3  Spotswood,  July,  1711. 


THE  PALATINE  SETTLEMENT.  345 

had  taken  thirty  years  before.  Then  Virginia  was  dominated  by 
a  faction  which,  as  far  as  it  took  any  interest  in  Carolina,  sympa- 
thized with  the  insurgents,  while  the  loyal  party  was  headed  by 
one  who  had  neither  intelligence  nor  energy  to  spare  for  his  neigh- 
bors' affairs.  Now  Virginia  was  at  peace  within  herself,  and  her 
Governor,  Spots  wood,  was  a  loyal,  resolute,  and  vigorous  man,  a 
worthy  successor  to  Nicholson.  He  came  forward  with  an  offer 
to  mediate  between  the  two  factions.  Cary  consented  to  a  con- 
ference, but  both  Hyde  and  Spotswood  distrusted  him,  fearing  a 
plot  to  seize  the  heads  of  the  loyal  party.  Cary  then  made  an 
attack  on  Hyde  from  the  sea.  Baffled  in  this,  he  penetrated  into 
the  country  of  the  Tuscaroras,  hitherto  at  peace  with  the  English, 
and  tried  to  bring  upon  the  colony  the  horrors  of  an  Indian  war. 
The  young  warriors  of  the  tribe  were  in  his  favor,  but  the  sober 
wisdom  of  the  chiefs  restrained  them.1  Cary's  party  then  broke 
up,  and  most  of  them  were  arrested,  some  in  Virginia.  Their 
further  fate  is  obscure,  but  as  their  leader,  Cary,  was  released  and 
lived  on  in  Virginia  unmolested,  we  may  suppose  that,  as  before, 
order  was  re-established  without  any  infliction  of  severity.2 

The  immediate  ill-consequences  of  Cary's  rebellion  were  but 
slight.  It  would  seem,  however,  to  have  had  some  share  in  bring- 
Troubies  ing  upon  the  colony  its  first  Indian  war.  Hitherto  the 
Indians6  relations  between  the  settlers  and  the  savages  had  been 
peaceful,  and  for  the  most  part  friendly.  There  had  been  petty 
disputes  concerning  land  and  trade,  and  in  1703,  Governor  Dan- 
iel benevolently  prohibited  the  sale  of  rum  to  the  savages.3  The 
natives  of  North  Carolina  migrated  or  dwindled  under  the  bane- 
ful influence  of  civilization.  Only  one  tribe,  the  Tuscaroras, 
numbering  twelve  hundred  warriors,  confronted  the  settlers  in 
sufficient  strength  to  be  a  source  of  alarm.4  In  171 1  they  came 
for  the  first  time  into  active  collision  with  the  English.  Cary's 
intrigues,  if  they  had  not  actually  instigated  the  Tuscaroras  to 
take  up  arms,  had  revealed  to  them  the  disunion  and  weakness 
of  the  settlers.  Moreover,  there  is  reason  to  think  that  the  in- 
trigues of  the  French  with  the  Indians  had  extended  so  far  as  to 
stir  them  up,  not  only  against  the  frontiers  of  New  York,  but 
even  against  the  more  distant  English  colonies.5 

1  Spotswood,  July,  1711.  2  Williamson,  vol.  i.  p.  176.  3  lb.,  p.  187. 

4  Williamson  gives  this  statement  apparently  on  the  authority  of  a  MS. 

5  Spotswood  states  this,  giving  as  his  authority  a  letter  from  the  Secretary  of  New  York  to 
the  Governor  of  North  Carolina. 


346  THE  TWO  CAROLINA S. 

The  actual  outbreak  of  hostilities  is  connected  with  events 
which  have  an  independent  interest  of  their  own.  After  the 
The  Paia-  second  devastation  of  the  Palatinate  in  1693,  a  num- 
settiement.  ber  of  the  houseless  inhabitants  had  fled  to  England  and 
established  themselves  there  under  the  protection  of  the  queen. 
There  were  at  this  time  in  Carolina  two  land  speculators,  Chris- 
topher de  Grafenried,  a  Swiss  baron,  and  one  Lewis  Mitchell, 
who  had  been  employed  by  the  canton  of  Bern  as  an  agent  to 
look  for  territory  suited  for  a  settlement.1  These  two  men  pur- 
chased a  tract  of  land  in  North  Carolina  which  they  decided  to 
people  with  six  hundred  of  the  exiled  Palatines.  The  English 
government  gave  a  sum  of  money  .towards  the  expenses  of  the 
journey,  and  this  help  was  supplemented  by  private  charity. 
Grafenried  and  Mitchell  were,  as  part  of  the  bargain,  to  provide 
tools  and  to  advance  stock  as  a  loan.  Three  hundred  and  fifty 
acres  were  alloted  to  each  household  at  a  fixed  rent,  and  the 
exiles  became  a  flourishing  community.2 

In  171 1  their  leader,  Grafenried,  as  it  would  seem  without 
fault  of  his  own,  brought  upon  the  colony  the  misfortune  of  an 
Execution  Indian  war.  He  made  an  exploring  journey  into  In- 
of  Lawson.  ^ian  territory  accompanied  by  John  Lawson,  the  state 
surveyor.3  Their  alleged  object  was  the  establishment  of  a  more 
convenient  land  route  to  Virginia.  Grafenried's  companion  had 
been  for  ten  years  a  sojourner  in  the  wilder  parts  of  Carolina,  and 
we  owe  to  his  pen  the  liveliest  and  most  familiar  account  of  the 
wilderness  and  its  occupants  which  the  early  colonial  age  pro- 
duced.4 .  Unfortunately  he  had  incurred  the  enmity  of  the  Indians 
both  in  the  discharge  of  his  official  duties  and,  as  it  would  seem, 
by  some  private  offenses.  Accordingly  he  and  Grafenried,  while 
traveling  without  any  suspicion  of  mischief,  were  suddenly  seized 
and  held  in  bondage  by  the  savages.  The  matter  was  conducted 
with  that  air  of  judicial  deliberation  which  we  not  unfrequently 
find  in  the  vengeful  actions  of  the  Indians.  Grafenried  pleaded 
that  he  was  no  Englishman,  but  the  chief  of  a  small  separate 
tribe.     He  was  released  on  payment  of  ransom,  promising  at  the 

1  Williamson,  vol.  i.  p,  182. 

2  The  agreement  of  Grafenried  and  Mitchell  with  the  Palatines  is  given  by  Williamson  in 
an  appendix,  vol.  i.  p.  275.  The  preamble  to  the  agreement  relates  the  circumstances  of  their 
settlement. 

8  The  circumstances  of  this  journey,  ending  in  the  death  of  Lawson,  are  told  in  a  letter 
from  Grafenried  to  Hyde,  published  by  Williamson  in  an  appendix,  vol.  i.  p.  192. 

4  The  book  is  somewhat  inappropriately  called  a  History  of  North  Carolina.  It  was  origi- 
nally published  at  London  in  1714,  and  was  republished  at  Raleigh  in  North  Carolina  in  i860. 
Mr.  Tyler  gives  a  good- summary  of  it,  vol.  ii.  p.  282. 


WAR  WITH  THE  TUSCARORAS.  347 

same  time  the  neutrality  of  the  Palatines  and  an  amnesty,  with 
certain  other  conditions,  in  the  name  of  the  English.  Towards 
Lawson  the  savages  were  unrelenting,  and  he  was  put  to  death, 
probably  with  all  the  horrors  of  an  Indian  execution. 

This  first  outrage  was  but  the  prelude  to  a  combined  attack  on 
the  English.  A  simultaneous  onslaught  was  made  on  the  fron- 
The  Tus-  tier  plantations  and  in  a  single  day  one  hundred  and 
war?  twenty  of  the  settlers  perished.1  Grafenried's  stipula- 
tion on  behalf  of  his  own  people  was  disregarded  and  the  Pala- 
tines furnished  half  the  victims. 

A  force  was  immediately  raised  against  the  Indians.  The 
colony  turned  for  help  to  its  southern  neighbor.  South  Carolina 
sent  a  body  of  auxiliaries  including  a  party  of  friendly  Indians.2 
The  supreme  command  seems  to  have  been  vested  in  the  leader 
of  the  South  Carolina  contingent,  Captain  Barnwell,  who,  it  is 
said,  had  some  private  grudge  against  Hyde.3  He  laid  siege  to 
the  chief  Indian  fort  and  quickly  reduced  it  to  extremities.  But 
instead  of  following  up  his  advantage,  Barnwell,  in  the  words  of 
Spotswood,  "  clapped  up  a  peace  on  unaccountable  terms."  He 
made  this  lenity  even  more  fatal  by  attacking  some  Indian  set- 
tlements in  defiance  of  his  treaty.  He  then  retreated  to  South 
Carolina,  leaving  his  unhappy  allies  to  pay  the  penalty  of  his 
treachery.  Scarcely  had  the  South  Carolina  troops  crossed  their 
own  frontier  when  two  English  settlements  were  subjected  to  the 
horrors  of  a  second  attack.  The  settlers  again  took  up  arms, 
and  a  force,  consisting  mainly  of  Indians,  was  sent  from  South 
Carolina  under  the  command  of  James  Moore,  whose  father  had 
not  long  before  held  the  office  of  Governor.  Virginia,  too,  voted 
a  sum  of  money  for  clothing  and  feeding  troops.  As  before 
the  Tuscaroras  were  besieged  in  their  chief  stronghold.  With 
an  unusual  wrant  of  prudence,  they  had  chosen  a  spot  un- 
furnished with  water.  This  oversight  was  fatal :  the  fort  fell  and 
nearly  all  the  defenders,  to  the  number  of  six  hundred,  were 
taken  prisoners,  a  loss  which  utterly  shattered  the  power  of  the 
tribe.  The  rest  of  the  Tuscaroras  came  to  terms  and  accepted  a 
humiliating  peace,  compelling  them  to  deliver  up  twenty  of  those 
who   were  -specially  guilty  of  the  first  massacre,   to  restore  all 

1  Williamson  says  a  hundred  and  thirty  without  giving  his  authority,  and  Mr.  Rivers  either 
confirms  or  follows  him.     Spotswood  distinctly  says  sixty  English  and  sixty  French. 

2  J  have  taken  my  account  of  what  follows  from  Spotswood's  dispatches  and  from  Mr. 
Rivers,  who  has  worked  up  the  MS.  journals  of  the  South  Carolina  Assembly. 

3  Williamson,  vol.  i.  p.  195. 


348  THE  TWO  CAROLINAS. 

prisoners  and  spoil  taken  from  the  English,  to  give  hostages,  and 
to  take  active  steps  towards  punishing  and  reducing  those  tribes 
with  whom  they  had  been  lately  in  alliance.1  One  remnant  of 
the  Tuscaroras  stayed  in  the  neighborhood  of  Roanoke,  the  rest 
wandered  northward  and  were  absorbed  into  the  confederacy  of 
the  Five  Nations.2  For  many  years  afterward  North  Carolina 
enjoyed  peace,  and  the  memory  of  her  one  Indian  war  was  only 
kept  alive  by  the  institution  of  a  solemn  fast  on  the  anniversary 
of  the  massacre.3 

Two  years  later  we  meet  with  the  first  recorded  specimen  of 
North  Carolina  legislation  since  the  days  of  Stephens.4  Unluckily, 
Records  of  tne  onty  portions  of  it  which  survive  are  those  which 
inSNorthn  Dear  on  reng10us  and  ecclesiastical  affairs,  and  on  the 
Carolina,  kindred  subject  of  moral  discipline.  The  Church  of 
England  was  for  the  first  time  established  by  law  and  nine  par- 
ishes laid  out.  At  the  same  time  liberty  of  conscience  was 
granted  to  Dissenters,  and  as  in  England,  an  affirmation  was 
accepted  from  Quakers  instead  of  an  oath.  Drunkenness,  in- 
continence, and  Sabbath-breaking  were  all  made  penal.  Legis- 
lation of  this  kind  tells  us  but  little  of  the  temper  and  character 
of  a  community.  It  may  either  represent  the  common  and 
natural  feeling  of  society,  or  it  may  be  a  violent  protest  against 
practical  abuses.  All  that  we  read  of  the  social  life  of  North 
Carolina  would  incline  us  to  the  latter  view. 

In  1720  the  first  event  occurred  which  throws  any  clear  light 
from  without  on  the  internal  life  of  the  colony.  In  that  year 
boundary  disputes  arose  between  Virginia  and  her  southern 
neighbor  and  it  was  found  necessary  to  appoint  representatives 
on  each  side  to  settle  the  boundary  line.5  The  chief  interest  of 
General  tne  ma-tter  lies  in  the  notes  left  to  us  by  one  of  the 
o?ntheion  Virginian  Commissioners.  Colonel  William  Byrd  was 
colony.  a  rich  planter,  whose  multifold  activities  and  varied 
accomplishments  recall  that  generation  of  Englishmen  to  which 
Virginia  owed  her  origin.  Educated  in  England,  then  called  to 
the  bar  and  elected  a  Fellow  of  the  Royal  Society,  afterwards  for 
thirty-seven  years  a  Councilor  in  Virginia,  three  times  agent  at  the 
English  court,  and  the  leading  spirit  in  every  industrial  enter- 

*  Williamson  publishes  this  treaty,  vol.  i.  p.  202.  2  lb.,  vol.  i.  p.  203. 

3  Trott's  Ecclesiastical  Laws,  p.  96.  *  lb.,  p.  83. 

4  The  following  account  is  taken  from  Byrd's  History  of  the  Dividing  Line,  published  in 
1841,  with  Byrd's  other  writings,  under  the  title  of  the  Westover  MS.  Mr.  Tyler  describes 
them  (vol.  ii.  p.  272)  and  gives  a  sketch  of  Byrd's  career. 


BYRD'S  ACCOUNT  OF  NORTH  CAROLINA.  349 

prise,  Byrd  shows  us  how  active  and  brilliant  a  career  lay  open 
to  a  great  Virginian  landholder.  His  description  of  North  Car- 
olina must  be  taken  with  some  deductions.  Its  counterpart  is  to 
be  found  in  those  accounts  of  Highland  life  given  by  English 
travelers  in  the  seventeenth  century,  from  which  historians  have 
drawn  an  exaggerated  picture  of  squalor  and  misery.  Byrd,  un- 
questionably, was  a  man  to  appreciate  keenly  the  contrast  be- 
tween the  habits  in  which  he  had  been  trained  and  the  sordid 
life  of  a  squatter  in  North  Carolina,  nor  was  he  likely  to  resist 
the  temptation  by  throwing  his  comments  into  a  pungent  and 
telling  form.  Yet,  after  making  all  such  deductions  and  check- 
ing Byrd's  report  of  that  of  graver  writers,  there  remains  a  pict- 
ure of  poverty,  indolence  and  thriftlessness,  which  finds  no  coun- 
terpart in  any  of  the  other  southern  colonies.  That  the  chief 
town  only  contained  some  fifty  poor  cottages  is  little  or  nothing 
more  than  what  we  find  in  Maryland  or  Virginia.  But  there  the 
import  trade  with  England  made  up  for  the  deficiencies  of  colo- 
nial life.  North  Carolina,  lacking  the  two  essentials  of  trade, 
harbors  and  a  surplus  population,  had  no  commercial  dealings 
with  the  mother  country.  Strings  of  pack-horses  brought  furs 
from  the  Catawba  Indians,  to  be  reshipped  in  small  New  England 
vessels  or  again  carried  overland  to  Virginia.  The  only  posses- 
sions which  abounded  were  horses  and  swine,  both  of  which  could 
be  reared  in  droves  without  any  care  or  attention.  The  abun- 
dance of  horses,  indeed,  was  an  evil,  since  it  encouraged  the 
slothfulness  of  the  settlers  and  withheld  them  from  exploring  those 
districts  which  could  only  be  reached  on  foot.  The  country  was 
well  fitted  for  horned  cattle,  but  that  resource  was  wasted,  as  the 
management  of  a  dairy  was  beyond  the  skill  of  a  North  Carolina 
housewife.  Even  hunting  seems  to  have  been  but  little  practiced, 
and  the  colonists  were  content  to  live  almost  wholly  on  pork,  to 
the  great  injury  of  their  health. 

The  evils  of  slavery  existed  without  its  counter-balancing  ad- 
vantages. There  was  nothing  to  teach  those  habits  of  adminis- 
tration which  the  rich  planters  of  Virginia  and  South  Carolina 
learned  as  part  of  their  daily  life.  At  the  same  time  the  colony 
suffered  from  one  of  the  worst  effects  of  slavery,  a  want  of  man- 
ual skill.  Carolina  tar  might  have  undersold  that  of  Scandi- 
navia in  the  English  market,  had  there  been  sufficient  intel- 
ligence and  industry  to  insure  good  packing.1 

1  Williamson,  vol.  ii.  p.  213. 


35° 


THE  TWO  CAROLINA  S. 


The  political  state  of  the  colony  is  told  in  language  which 
recalls  the  mediaeval  description  of  Northern  Italy  when 

De  tributo  Caesaris  nemo  cogitabat, 
Omnes  erant  Caesares,  nemo  censum  clabat. 

The  protection  which  the  law  granted  to  alien  debtors  was  in 
itself  a  guaranty  for  the  presence  of  a  worthless  population. 

Religious  authority  fared  no  better  than  civil.  Edenton  en- 
joyed, according  to  Byrd,  the  evil  pre-eminence  of  being  the 
one  capital  in  the  world  without  any  place  of  worship. 

During  all  this  time  the  influence  and  authority  of  the  Propri- 
etors was  but  a  dead  letter.  All  idea  of  enforcing  the  Funda- 
Extinttion  mental  Constitutions  had  long  been  abandoned.  The 
Proprie-  constitution  of  the  colony  was  assimilated  to  that  of  its 
emment."  neighbors.  The  Governor  and  five  of  the  Council  were 
nominated  by  the  Proprietors,  the  remaining  five  by  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  people.  The  lower  house  was  elected  by  pre- 
cincts, of  which  there  were  originally  four,  each  returning  five 
members.  New  precincts  were  added,  each  of  which  returned 
two,  a  difference  which  gave  rise  to  more  than  one  dispute.1  In 
1729  the  faint  and  meaningless  shadow  of  proprietary  govern- 
ment came  to  an  end.2  The  crown  bought  up  first  the  shares  of 
seven  Proprietors,  then  after  an  interval  that  of  the  eighth.  In 
the  case  of  other  colonies  the  process  of  transfer  had  been  effected 
by  a  conflict  and  by  something  approaching  to  revolution.  In 
North  Carolina  alone  it  seems  to  have  come  about  with  the 
peaceful  assent  of  all  parties.  To  the  Proprietors  it  was  a  dis- 
tinct financial  gain.  To  the  crown  it  was  advantageous  as  a 
measure  of  administration,  especially  in  dealing  with  smugglers. 
For  the  colonists  themselves  the  proprietary  government  had  done 
nothing  which  was  likely  to-  win  their  loyalty  or  gratitude.  Thus, 
without  a  struggle,  North  Carolina  cast  off  all  traces  of  its  pecul- 
iar origin  and  passed  into  the  ordinary  state  of  a  crown  colony. 

We  must  now  return  to  the  more  populous  and  far  more  pros- 
perous colony  south  of  Cape  Fear.  The  first  attempt  of  the 
The  settle-  Proprietors  in  that  direction  was  made  at  about  the 
caepe  Fear,  same  time  and  in  the  same  fashion  as  that  at  Albe- 
marle.     Instead  of  relying  on  the  resources  and  surplus  popula- 

1  Williamson,  vol.  i.  p.  163 ;  vol.  ii.  p.  57.     Compare  the  Proprietors'  instructions  to  Har- 
vey, President  of  the  Council,  1679,  February  5. 

2  Williamson,  vol.  ii.  p.  25.     The  ease  with  which  the  transfer  was  effected  is  shown  by  the 
slight  traces  left  in  contemporary  documents. 


THE  SE  TTLEMENT  A  T  CA  PE  FEA  R.  3  ,  x 

tion  of  the  mother  country,  the  Proprietors  aimed  at  peopling 
their  territories  from  the  overflow  of  the  other  colonies.  As  Vir- 
ginia was  to  be  the  parent  of  North  Carolina,  so  was  Barbadoes 
to  furnish  the  Southern  colony.  In  each  case  the  Proprietors 
were  not  so  much  establishing  a  colony  of  their  own  as  taking 
advantage  of  an  impulse  which  drove  a  body  of  independent  set- 
tlers towards  their  territory. 

In  August,  1663,  a  number  of  rich  planters  in  Barbadoes  pro- 
posed to  purchase  a  tract  of  land  in  Carolina  from  the  Proprie- 
tors, on  condition  that  they  were  allowed  to  form  an  independent 
community  with  legislative  powers.1  The  details  of  their  pro- 
cedure are  very  obscure,  and  we  must  be  content  with  isolated 
facts  which  enable  us  to  trace  the  general  course  which  the  prog- 
ress of  the  colony  took.  In  January,  1665,  the  Proprietors 
granted  to  Sir  John  Yeamans,  an  old  Cavalier  settled  in  Barba- 
does, a  commission  investing  him  with  powers  closely  resembling 
those  given  to  Stephens.2  The  most  noteworthy  feature  in  his 
instructions  is  a  clause  bidding  him  do  his  utmost  to  encourage 
immigration  from  New  England,  whence  the  chief  stock  of  set- 
tlers might  be  expected.  The  spot  chosen  for  the  settlement  was 
Cape  Fear,  or,  as  some  more  euphemistically  called  it,  Cape 
Fair,  a  promontory  a  hundred  and  sixty  miles  southwest  of  Al- 
bemarle.3 The  colony  began  prosperously,  and  within  a  year  of 
its  first  settlement  numbered  eight  hundred  inhabitants.4  Then 
we  suddenly  lose  sight  of  it.  Yeamans  was  afterwards  promoted 
to  the  Governorship  of  the  more  important  settlement  on  Ashley 
River,  and  it  is  probable  that  his  personal  influence  brought  about 
the  gradual  and  informal  amalgamation  of  the  two  settlements. 
The  only  lasting  effect  of  the  colony  at  Cape  Fear  was  to  imbue 
the  settlers  of  Carolina  with  the  habits  and  traditions  of  Barba- 
does, and  thus  to  further  the  process  which  made  South  Carolina 
prominent  among  the  Southern  colonies  as  the.  stronghold  of 
slavery. 

While  the  settlements  at  Albemarle  and  Cape  Fear  were  strug- 
gling on,  neglected  and  obscure,  the  energies  of  the  Proprietors 
Sandford's  were  fading  full  scope  elsewhere.  In  all  their  pro- 
voyage,       ceedings  which  we  have  at  present  followed,  the  Pro- 

1  Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  xx.  p.  10.  2  lb.,  pp.  20-22. 

3  It  is  first  formally  called  Cape  Fear  in  the  proposal  of  the  Barbadoes  planters,  above  re- 
ferred to.     In  Yeamans's  instructions  it  is  called  Cape  Fair. 

4  This  is  stated  in  The  Brief  Descriptio7i  0/  Carolina,  1666.  The  writer,  however,  ante- 
dates the  colony  by  a  year.  The  official  documents  above  referred  to  leave  no  doubt  as  to  the 
true  date. 


352 


THE  TWO  CAROL  WAS. 


prietors  were  only  playing  the  part  of  landholders  with  a  territory 
occupied  and  cultivated  by  tenants  living  and  working  after  their 
own  fashion.  Now,  for  the  first  time,  we  see  them  entering  on 
the  task  of  colonization  with  a  persistency  and  a  disregard  of 
outlay  which  recalls  the  early  days  of  the  Virginia  Company.  In 
June,  1666,  they  sent  forth  their  secretary,  Robert  Sandford,  on 
a  voyage  of  discovery.1  His  adventures,  told  by  himself  with 
great  fullness  and  graphic  simplicity,  recall  the  days  of  Amidas 
and  Gosnold.  After  narrowly  escaping  shipwreck,  he  explored 
the  coast  from  Albemarle  to  Port  Royal  and  followed  the  course 
of  a  river,  probably  the  Pedee,  for  thirty  miles  inland,  delighted 
with  the  kindness  of  the  Indians  and  the  richness  of  the  country. 
Foremost  in  the  work  of  exploration  was  a  friend  of  Shaftesbury, 
Dr.  Woodward,  whose  name  appears  more  than  once  in  the  an- 
nals of  the  colony.  The  discoverers  found  traces  of  the  Spaniards, 
afterwards  such  dangerous  neighbors  to  Carolina,  in  a  cross  erected 
in  an  Indian  village,  but  no  longer  remembered  as  an  object  of 
worship.  The  homeward,  like  the  outward  voyage,  was  beset  by 
dangers.  The  fleet  of  three  vessels  touched  at  Cape  Fear.  There 
they  found  the  colony  in  such  distress  that  it  was  deemed  neces- 
sary to  dispatch  one  vessel  to  New  England  to  procure  food.  In 
place  of  this  ship  Sandford  hired  a  Barbadoes  merchantman.  Of 
what  follows  he  tells  us  enough  to  excite  our  curiosity  without 
satisfying  it.  The  captain,  he  says,  went  mad  and  threw  himself 
overboard,  and  the  ship  returned  to  Charles  River  "under  the 
much  more  quiet  and  constant,  but  little  more  knowing  and  pru- 
dent, conduct  of  a  child." 

The  Proprietors  now  determined  to  establish  a  colony  near  the 
mouth  of  the  river  explored  by  Sandford.  The  settlement  was 
Project  of  a  to  be  composed  of  a  number  of  emigrants  from  Eng- 
coiony.rn  land  reinforced  by  others  from  Ireland,  and  possibly 
from  Barbadoes  and  the  Bermudas.  The  government  was  en- 
trusted to  a  planter  from  the  last-named  colony,  William  Sayle,  a 
Puritan  and  a  Nonconformist,  whose  religious  bigotry,  advanced 
age,  and  failing  health  all  promised  badly  for  his  discharge  of  the 
task  before  him.2     His  deficiencies  were  fortunately  supplemented 

1  Sandford's  account  of  his  voyage  occupies  thirty-two  pages  of  MS.  in  the  Shaftesbury 
Papers. 

2  Sayle's  own  letters  show  more  piety  than  ability.  Yeamans,  writing  to  the  Proprietors, 
November  15,  1670,  describes  him  as  a  man  of  no  great  sufficiency.  West  says  that  he  was 
"  very  aged,  and  hath  much  lost  himself  in  his  government " ;  and  another  settler,  writing 
from  Carolina,  plainly  calls  him  "ancient  and  crazed." 


SCHEMES  OF  THE  PROPRIETORS.  ^ 

by  the  abilities  of  Joseph  West,  who  was  entrusted  with  the  com- 
mand of  the  fleet  till  it  reached  Carolina.  He  was  also  ap- 
pointed storekeeper,  and  in  this  capacity  and  in  his  subsequent 
career  as  Governor  controlled  for  twelve  years  the  finances  and 
well-being  of  the  colony.1  As  in  the  case  of  North  Carolina,  the 
Fundamental  Constitutions  were  suspended  as  unfitted  for  an  in- 
fant colony.  The  temporary  constitution  which  was  to  supply 
their  place  was  embodied  in  the  commission  and  instructions  is- 
sued to  Sayle.2  The  Governor,  as  in  North  Carolina,  was  to  be 
assisted  by  a  Council  of  ten,  half  appointed  by  the  Proprietors, 
half  elected  by  the  freemen.  The  freemen  were  also  to  elect  a 
Parliament  of  twenty  representatives,  and  the  whole  was  to  form 
a  legislative  body  of  two  chambers.  The  Governor  and  Council 
were  to  appoint  courts  of  law  and  might  nominate  a  Deputy- 
Governor  to  act  in  the  Governor's  absence.  The  greater  offices 
of  state  were  to  be  vested  in  the  Proprietors'  deputies,  the  lesser 
were  appointed  on  a  peculiar  and  cumbrous  system,  each  of  them 
being  nominated  by  one  of  the  higher  rank. 

The  views  of  the  Proprietors  as  to  the  social  and  industrial 
state  of  the  colony  are  clearly  shown  in  the  instructions  issued  to 
industrial  Sayle  and  his  successors.3  The  Proprietors  made  it 
theepro-  °f  fully  clear  that  tneir  °bject  was  not,  on  the  one  hand, 
prietors.  to  .establish  a  mere  factory  for  trade,  nor,  on  the  other, 
to  stock  a  territory  with  cattle,  but  to  build  up  gradually  and 
carefully  a  community  containing^  in  itself  both  the  agricultural 

anH  rnmmprrial  elempnrs  pppdfnl  fpr  prosperity.  West  was  in- 
structed in  very  plain  and  forcible  language  to  "  provide  for  the 
belly  by  planting  store  of  provisions  "  before  he  aimed  at  pro- 
ducing merchantable  commodities,  save  in  small  quantities  by 
way  of  trial.  Nor  were  any  of  the  Proprietors'  vessels  to  be  used 
for  trade  so  as  to  divert  them  from  their  proper  task  of  transport- 
ing emigrants.  A  hundred  and  fifty  acres  of  land  were  to  be 
granted  to  every  freeman  who  went  out  at  his  own  cost,  with  an 
addition  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  for  every  man-servant,  and  one 
hundred  for  every  woman-servant  whom  he  might  transport.  A 
hundred  acres  were  to  be  granted  to  all  servants  at  the  expira- 
tion of  their  term  of  service.  These  quantities  were  to  be  dimin- 
ished in  the  next  year  to  one  hundred  acres,  and  seventy  acres 

1  Mr.  Rivers  well  sums  up  West's  good  services,  p.  130, 

2  Carolina  Entry  Book,  No.  xx. 

3  All  these  are  to  be  found  in  the  Board  of  Trade  Entrv  Books,  and  are  quoted  by  Mr. 
Rivers  in  his  Appendix.  23 


L 


354  THE  TWO  CARQLINAS. 

respectively,  and  after  that  date  to  seventy  and  sixty.  The 
poorer  class  of  settlers  were  to  be  supplied  with  food,  clothes,  and 
tools  as  a  loan  out  of  the  common  store. 

Especially  were  the  Proprietors  anxious  that  the  settlements 
should,  like  those  of  New  England,  be  grouped  round  some  ur- 
ban centre,  instead  of  being,  like  Maryland  and  Virginia,  scat- 
tered abroad  over  the  country.  The  Governor  was  instructed  to 
choose  the  first  eligible  site  on  the  river  for  a  town.  Others  were 
to  be  laid  out  on  navigable  rivers,  each  having  a  wharf  in  com- 
mon. Every  freeholder  was  to  have,  in  addition  to  his  country 
estate,  a  town  lot  of  one-twentieth  the  extent  of  his  whole  do- 
main. The  acquisition  of  large  unoccupied  territories  was  kept 
in  check  by  the  condition  that  a  grant  of  a  barony  was  to  be  void 
unless  the  territory  was  within  seven  years  occupied  by  thirty 
tenants.  In  the  case  of  a  manor  fifteen  tenants  were  required. 
The  danger  of  a  conflict  with  the  savages  was  guarded  against 
by  two  provisions,  one  forbidding  any  settlement  within  two  and 
a  half  miles  of  an  Indian  town,  unless  a  river  intervened,  the 
other  prohibiting  the  enslavement  of  any  native. 

The  Proprietors  went  yet  further  in  the  task  of  supervision. 
Their  instructions  to  West  touch  on  minute  details  of  manage- 
ment. They  specify  the  number  and  age  of  the  men  to  be 
shipped  at  Barbadoes,  the  kind  of  soil  in  which  the  grapes  are  to 
be  planted,  the  cultivation  of  ginger  and  of  the  various  seeds  and 
roots  which  are  to  be  brought  from  the  West  Indies.  Even  the 
exact  amount  of  food  to  be  served  out  from  the  public  store  is 
specified,  and  a  fixed  rate  laid  down  at  which  the  proprietary 
dues  may  be  paid  in  the  commodities  of  the  country. 

In  the  same  year  the  Proprietors  sent  out  a  vessel  to  trade  on 
their  behalf.  The  instructions  to  the  captain  are  interesting  as 
illustrating  both  the  minute  care  of  the  Proprietors  and  the  com- 
mercial prospects  of  the  new  settlement.1  Halstead,  the  com- 
mander of  the  vessel,  is  to  inspect  and  report  on  the  state  of  the 
colony,  and  to  arrange  a  trade  between  Carolina,  Barbadoes,  and 
the  Bermudas.  He  is  to  inquire  into  the  resources  of  the  coun- 
try in  wood,  fisheries,  and  dyeing  stuffs.  From  Carolina  he  is  to 
sail  to  Barbadoes  with  a  freight  of  timber  and  pipestaves.  Thence 
he  is  to  take  on  board  a  cargo  of  rum  and  sugar,  and  also  a  party 
of  emigrants  for  Carolina.  Having  landed  the  latter,  he  is  to  take 
his  goods  to  Virginia,  and  thence  to  bring  cattle  and  provisions 

1  These  are  printed  by  Mr.  Rivers  in  his  Appendix,  p.  359. 


EARLY  YEARS  OF  THE  COLONY.  355 

for  Carolina.  From  Carolina  he  is  to  bring  a  second  load  of 
timber  to  Barbadoes  to  be  exchanged  for  goods  suited  for  the 
Bahamas.  Finally  he  is  to  bring  a  ship-load  of  timber  from  Car- 
olina to  England.  During  his  voyages  he  is  to  lose  no  oppor- 
tunity of  studying  the  products  of  the  various  countries  for  the 
benefit  of  the  settlers. 

In  January,  1670,  the  fleet  set  sail.  The  attempt  to  get  addi- 
tional emigrants  from  Ireland  failed.  A  letter  from  Kinsale  tells 
The  early  the  Proprietors  that  the  Cromwellian  settlement  had  so 
thecoiony.  increased  the  prosperity  of  the  country  that  there  was 
no  longer  a  superfluity  of  unemployed  labor.1  In  April  the  set- 
tlers reached  their  new  home.  The  spot  originally  designed  for 
them,  Port  Royal,  was  found  to  be  an  unsuitable  site.  Accord- 
ingly the  settlers  established  themselves  about  fifty  miles  north- 
ward, on  a  high  point  on  the  bank  of  Ashley  River.2  The  site 
of  the  new  settlement  was  called  Albemarle  Point,  in  disregard 
of  the  fact  that  the  name  had  already  been  taken  by  the  northern 
colony.  During  the  course  of  the  following  winter  Sayle  died. 
His  place  was  temporarily  filled  by  West  upon  the  nomination  of 
the  Council.3  This  appointment,  however,  was  not  confirmed  by 
the  Proprietors.  Yeamans,  whom  we  last  saw  as  Governor  of 
the  colony  at  Cape  Fear,  had  been  promoted  to  the  rank  of  land- 
grave, and  had  thereby  acquired  a  claim  to  the  position  of  Gov- 
ernor. Accordingly,  on  the  29th  of  April,  1672,  he  was  formally 
proclaimed  at  the  settlement  at  Albemarle  Point,  now  called 
Chaiiestown.4  West,  during  his  temporary  tenure  of  office,  had 
administered  the  affairs  of  the  colony  with  energy  and  wisdom, 
and  the  Proprietors  evidently  felt  that  they  owed  him  some  ex- 
planation of  the  appointment  of  Yeamans.5  The  rule  of  the  new 
Governor  seems  to  have  been  unsatisfactory  alike  to  the  settlers 

1  Shaftesbury  Papers,  1679. 

2  No  reason  is  given  for  the  change.  Probably  Port  Royal  was  too  much  exposed  to  inva- 
sion from  St.  Augustine.  That  this  danger  was  not  overlooked  is  shown  by  letters  from 
Owen,  a  leading  settler,  to  the  Proprietors.  He  says  that  the  Spaniards  had  taught  the  Indi- 
ans "only  to  admire  the  Spanish  nation,  and  to  pay  them  adoration  equal  to  a  deity,  possess- 
ing them  with  an  opinion  that  the  Spanish  people  is  of  an  angelical  production,  and  that  they 
are  the  only  masters  of  the  world,  and  that  all  other  people  are  their  slaves  and  vassals,  and 
those  people  that  are  not  subject  to  them  are  to  be  destroyed."— Shaftesbury  Papers,  Sep- 
tember 15,  1670. 

3  Dispatch  from  the  Council  to  the  Proprietors.  March,  1671. 

4  Rivers,  p.  109.  The  name  of  Charlestown  is  formally  conferred  by  Shaftesbury  in  a  let- 
fer  to  West,  October,  1670. 

5  Rivers,  p.  in.  The  Proprietors  contrast  "the  care,  fidelity,  and  prudence"  of  West 
with  the  conduct  of  Yeamans.  Shaftesbury,  in  one  of  his  letters  to  West,  justifies  the  ap- 
pointment of  Yeamans  in  a  half-apologetic  manner. 


356 


THE  TWO  CAROTIN  AS. 


and  the  Proprietors.  The  profit  of  the  latter  was  sacrificed  to 
the  interest  of  Yeamans's  friends  from  Barbadoes.  At  the  same 
time  the  Governor  became  so  unpopular  with  the  colonists  that 
we  find  Shaftesbury,  in  1672,  recommending  his  removal  on  that 
ground.  That  step,  however,  was  not  taken  till  1674.  In  that 
year  West  was  created  a  landgrave,  and  was  appointed  Governor 
in  place  of  Yeamans.  It  is  not  impossible  that  ill-health  may 
have  at  least  served  as  a  pretext  for  the  change,  since  in  the  fol- 
lowing August  Yeamans  died  in  Barbadoes. 

His  successor  held  the  office  of  Governor  for  twelve  years,  ex- 
cepting one  short  interval  of  supersession.  The  best  proof  of  his 
state  of  efficiency  is  the  fact  that  during  that  whole  time,  though 
underlony  taere  was  no  la°k  of  discord  among  the  settlers,  nor  of 
West.  in  feeling  between  them  and  the  Proprietors,  West  en- 
joyed the  confidence  and  good- will  of  all  parties. 

The  records  of  these  years  give  us  a  clear  picture  of  the  social, 
industrial,  and  political  life  of  the  young  community.  The  sec- 
ond site  of  the  colony  was  found  unwholesome,  and  a  rival  settle- 
ment to  Charlestown  sprang  up  at  Oyster  Point.  The  superior 
healthfulness  and  convenience  of  the  new  site  gradually  drew  off 
settlers,  and  in  1680  the  seat  of  government  was  formally  trans- 
ferred thither,  while  at  the  same  time  the  new  capital  was  consti- 
tuted the  chief  port  of  the  colony,1  and  formally  received  the 
name  of  Charlestown.  In  the  course  of  the  next  year  there  were 
more  than  twenty  houses  built  on  the  new  site,  and  as  many 
more  planned.2  Oyster  Point,  however,  did  not  prove  thoroughly 
healthy,  and  in  1682,  and  again  in  1686,  we  find  the  Proprietors 
instructing  their  Governor  to  look  out  for  a  new  site.3 

In  spite  of  its  drawbacks,  Charlestown 4  remained  the  capital 
of  the  colony,  a«d  attained  a  degree  of  importance  and  complete- 
ness unknown  to  any  other  city  in  the  southern  colonies.  Two 
years  after  its  establishment  as  the  capital,  Charlestown  was  reg- 
ularly laid  out  in  large,  commodious,  and  uniform  streets.5  In- 
cidental references  scattered  through  the  records  of  the  time  show 
the  reality  and  importance  of  town  life  in  Carolina.  Among  the 
proceedings  of  the  Council  we  find  special  provision  made  for  the 
.due  management  of  the  watch  and  for  mustering  the  forces  at  the 

1  The  change  of  capital  is  described  by  Rivers,  p.  129. 

2  Letter  from  the  Proprietors,  February,  1681. 

3  See  the  Instructions  to  Sir  Robert  Kyrle  and  James  Colleton; 

4  I  mean,  of  course,  New  Charlestown,  the  settlement  at  Oyster  Point     I  shall  henceforth: 
use  the  name  always  in  that  sense. 

6  Ash,  in  Carroll,  vol.  ii.  p.  82. 


PROGRESS  OF  THE  COLONY.  357 

capital  in  case  of  a  sudden  attack.1  In  no  part  of  their  policy 
were  the  Proprietors  more  energetic  and  more  successful  than  in 
forcing  urban  life  on  the  settlers  and  preventing  them  from  spread- 
ing abroad  in  scattered  plantations  after  the  manner  of  the  Vir- 
ginians.2 Every  navigable  river  was  to  have  a  port  town.3  No 
grant  of  land  was  tp  hold  good  more  than  fifty  miles  north  or 
south  of  Ashley  River,  or  more  than  sixty  miles  inland.4  A 
squatter  population  was  kept  in  check  by  an  order  that  no  grant 
over  and  above  the  original  allotment  should  be  valid,  unless 
within  a  year  the  occupant  built  a  town  house  of  two  stories.5 
These  restrictions,  while  insuring  the  future  prosperity  of  the  colony, 
may  have  had  a  share  in  retarding  the  increase  of  population. 
By  1682  on  the  most  favorable  calculation,  it  fell  short  of  three 
thousand.6  The  principal  exports  as  yet  were  furs  and  timber. 
Tobacco  was  cultivated,  but  the  Virginian  planters  had  too  firm 
a  hold  of  the  English  market  to  be  ousted.  Cattle  and  hogs  did 
well  without  any  care,  and  the  abundance  of  fish  and  game  re- 
leased the  settlers  from  the  need  of  labor.7  Indeed,  the  chief 
drawback  to  the  country  was  too  great  fertility,  with  the  accom- 
panying dangers  of  sloth  and  thriftlessness. 

The  sources  from  which  the  colony  drew  its  population  were 
various.  The  original  supply  of  emigrants  from  England  was  re- 
Settlers  inforced  from  the  Bahamas  and  Barbadoes,  and  possi- 
from  bly  from  Ireland.     In   1671   a  small  band  of  settlers 

various  J  ' 

countries,  came  from  New  York.  At  first  they  formed  a  separate 
community,  but  in  time  they  were  absorbed  in  the  general  mass 
of  colonists.8  In  1679  two  vessels  sent  out  at  the  expense  of 
Charles  II.  brought  a  band  of  French  'Protestants,  intended  to 
introduce  among  the  settlers  the  culture  of  silk-worms,  vines,  and 
olives.9 

Another  of  these  alien  settlements  played  a  more  conspicuous 
part  in  the  history  of  the  colony.     About  1680  a  few  leading 

1  Records  of  the  Grand  Council,  quoted  by  Mr.  Rivers,  pp.  374,  379. 

2  Shaftesbury  expressly  contrasts  Virginia  and  New  England,  and  holds  up  the  latter  as  a 
model  in  a  letter  to  Sayle,  April,  1679,  and  again  to  Yeamans. 

3  Instructions  to  Moreton,  May,  1682.  *  16. 
6  The  Proprietors'  instructions,  May,  1680. 

6  Ash,  in  Carroll,  vol.  ii.  p.  82. 

7  lb.,  pp.  69-72.     Rivers,  p.  115. 

8  A  document  in  the  Shaftesbury  Papers,  including  extracts  from  letters  written  by  vari- 
ous leading  colonists  to  the  Proprietors,  states  that  two  hundred  families  are  ready  to  come 
from  New  York.  This  is  in  November,  1671.  Another  undated  document  states  that  many 
had  come. 

9  Journal  of  Board  of  Trade,  No.  Hi.  p.  15. 


358 


THE  TWO  CAROLINAS. 


Scotch  Presbyterians  planned  the  establishment  of  a  refuge  for 
their  persecuted  brethren  within  the  bounds  of  Carolina.  The 
The  Scotch  plan  shrank  to  smaller  dimensions  than  those  originally 
RoyaU  contemplated.  Finally  Lord  Cardross,  with  a  colony 
of  ten  Scotch  families,  settled  on  the  vacant  territory  of  Port 
Royal.  The  fate  of  the  settlement  foreshadowed  the  miseries  of 
Darien.  It  suffered  alike  from  the  climate  and  from  the  jeal- 
ousy of  the  English  settlers.  The  hot  swamps  of  Carolina  were 
no  fit  abode  for  the  natives  of  a  high  latitude.  Cardross  seems 
to  have  regarded  himself  as  the  head  of  a  separate  settlement, 
dependent  on  the  Proprietors,  but  disconnected  from  the  govern- 
ment of  Charlestown.  As  might  have  been  expected,  differences 
soon  arose :  Cardross  quarreled  with  the  authorities  at  Charles- 
town,  and  returned  to  Scotland  to  play  a  not  inglorious  part  in 
the  coming  struggle. 

The  Scotch  colony,  forsaken  by  its  leaders,  was  exposed  to 
special  perils.  For  nearly  ten  years  the  dread  of  a  Spanish  at- 
The  colony  tac^  nac*  hung  over  South  Carolina.  The  border  set- 
byThed  tlement  of  St.  Augustine  was  but  two  days'  sail  from 
Spaniards,  the  frontier;  Port  Royal,  perhaps  the  weakest  point 
in  the  English  settlement,  was  the  southernmost  and  so  the  most 
exposed,  and  the  Spaniard,  though  no  longer  as  powerful,  was 
as  jealous  and  unscrupulous  a  neighbor  as  in  the  days  of  Lau- 
donniere  and  Menendez.  In  1680  the  threatened  storm  broke 
upon  the  colony.  Three  galleys  landed  an  invading  force  at 
Edisto,  where  the  Governor  and  Secretary  had  private  houses, 
plundered  them  of  money,  plate,  and  slaves,  and  killed  the  Gov- 
ernor's brother-in-law.  They  then  fell  upon  the  Scotch  settlement, 
which  had  now  shrunk  to  twenty-five  men,  and  swept  it  clean 
out  of  existence.  The  colonists  did  not  sit  down  tamely  under 
their  injuries.  They  raised  a  force  of  four  hundred  men  and  were 
on  the  point  of  making  a  retaliatory  attack  when  they  were 
checked  by  an  order  from  the  Proprietors.  The  colonists,  they 
said,  might  defend  themselves,  and  even,  in  the  heat  of  victory, 
pursue  the  enemy  into  his  own  territory,  but  they  might  not  de- 
liberately wage  a  war  of  retaliation.  And  then,  though  perhaps 
unconscious  of  the  full  importance  of  the  question,  they  pointed 

1  For  the  history  of  the  Scotch  colony  up  to  the  time  of  Cardross's  departure,  see  Rivers,  pp. 
142-3,  and  the  Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  xxii.  pp.  45,  221.  Mr.  Rivers  also  publishes  in  an 
Appendix  (pp.  407-409)  two  letters  from  Cardross.  which  illustrate  his  relation  to  the  Gov- 
ernment at  Charlestown. 


ENS  LA  VEMENT  OF  INDIANS.  359 

out  the  danger  of  allowing  a  dependency  to  declare  war  on  a 
power  which  was  at  peace  with  the  mother  country.1 

The  Proprietors  may  have  felt,  too,  that  although  the  immediate 
attack  was  unprovoked,  the  colonists  were  not  wholly  blameless  in 
the  matter.  The  Spaniards  had  suffered  from  the  ravages  of 
pirates  who  were  believed  to  be  befriended  by  the  inhabitants  of 
Enslave-      Charlestown.2     In  another  way,  too,  the  settlers  had 

merit  of  the  .......  .  _, 

Indians  placed  a  weapon  in  the  hands  of  their  enemies.  The 
pfanters.  Spaniards  were  but  little  to  be  dreaded,  unless  strength- 
ened by  an  Indian  alliance.  The  English  colonists  themselves 
increased  this  danger  by  too  faithful  an  imitation  of  Spanish 
usages.  In  both  the  other  colonies  with  which  we  have  dealt, 
the  troubles  with  the  Indians  were  mostly  due  to  those  collisions 
which  must  inevitably  occur  between  civilized  and  savage  races. 
But  from  the  first  settlement  of  Carolina  the  colony  was  tainted 
with  a  vice  which  imperiled  its  relations  with  the  Indians.  Bar- 
badoes,  as  we  have  seen,  had  a  large  share  in  the  original  settle- 
ment of  Carolina.  In  that  colony  negro  slavery  was  already 
firmly  established  as  the  one  system  of  industry.  At  the  time 
when  Yeamans  and  his  followers  set  sail  for  the  shores  of  Caro- 
lina, Barbadoes  had  probably  two  negroes  for  every  one  white 
inhabitant.  The  soil  and  climate  of  the  new  territory  did  every- 
thing to  confirm  the  practice  of  slavery,  and  South  Carolina  was 
from  the  outset  what  she  ever  after  remained,  the  peculiar  home 
of  that  evil  usage.  To  the  West  India  planter  every  man  of  dark 
color  seemed  a  natural  and  proper  object  of  traffic.  The  settler 
in  Carolina  soon  learned  the  same  view.  In  Virginia  and  Mary- 
land there  are  but  few  traces  of  any  attempt  to  enslave  the  In- 
dians. In  Carolina  the  negro  must  always  have  been  the  cheap- 
er, more  docile,  and  more  efficient  instrument,  and  in  time  the 
African  race  furnished  the  whole  supply  of  servile  labor.  But  in 
the  early  days  of  the  colony  the  negro  had  no  such  monopoly  of 
suffering.  The  Indian  was  kidnapped  and  sold,  sometimes  to 
work  on  what  had  once  been  his  own  soil,  sometimes  to  end  his 
days  as  an  exile  and  bondsman  in  the  West  Indies.  As  late  as 
1708  the  native  population  furnished  a  quarter  of  the  whole  body 
of  slaves.3 

1  I  have  relied  mainly  on  Mr.  Rirers  for  the  account  of  this  Spanish  invasion.  References 
to  intrigues  between  the  Spaniards  and  Indians  are  frequently  to  be  found  in  contemporary 
documents. 

2  The  Proprietors'  Instructions  to  Colleton.      Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  xxu\  p.  103. 

8  Report  to  the  Proprietors  in  1708,  signed  by  the  Governor,  Sir  Nathaniel  Johnson,  and 
four  Councilors.     This  is  given  in  full  by  Mr.  Rivers,  p.  231. 


360  THE  TWO  CAROLINAS. 

It  would  be  unfair  to  attribute  all  the  hostilities  between  the 
Indians  and  the  colonists  to  this  one  source,  but  it  is  clear  that 
it  was  an  important  factor.  From  their  very  earliest  days  the 
settlers  were  involved  in  troubles  with  their  savage  neighbors. 
The  Kussoes,  a  tribe  on  the  southern  frontier,  claimed  to  be  the 
allies  of  the  Spaniards,  and  irritated  the  settlers  by  insults  and 
petty  depredations.  Yet  it  is  hard  to  see  what  injuries  had  been 
done  which  could  justify  the  English  in  declaring  war.  This, 
however,  they  did  in  September,  167 1.1  The  Kussoes  were  at 
once  defeated  and  the  prisoners  sentenced  to  be  sold  out  of  the 
colony,  unless  ransomed  by  their  countrymen. 

In  the  next  year  another  tribe,  the  Westoes,  appeared  so 
threatening  that  a  force  was  raised  against  them.  Nothing,  how- 
ever, came  of  this.2  We  find  the  same  tribe,  a  few  years  later, 
capturing  Indians  who  were  friendly  to  the  English  and  selling 
them  to  the  settlers.  The  Council  did  its  best  to  interfere  by 
sending  round  two  commissioners  to  liberate  such  captives,  but 
the  mere  fact  itself  shows  how  firmly  the  traffic  in  slaves  had 
taken  hold  of  the  colonists.3  The  Proprietors  strove  resolutely  to 
suppress  a  practice  of  which  they  saw  at  least  the  danger,  if  not 
the  enormity.  A  colony  of  slaveholders,  whose  frontier  was  men- 
aced" by  a  civilized  neighbor,  skilled  to  avail  himself  of  the  preju- 
dices and  passions  of  the  savage,  could  ill  afford  to  provoke  un- 
necessary hostility.  The  Indians,  if  friendly,  might  prove  valu- 
able assistants  and  guides,  alike  in  the  chase  of  wild  beasts  and 
of  runaway  negroes.4  More  than  one  entry  in  the  official  records 
of  the  colony  show  us  the  Proprietors  protesting  against  unpro- 
voked attacks  on  the  liberty  of  the  Indians.5  It  is  even  said  that 
the  best  and  most  popular  of  the  early  Governors,  West,  owed  his 
temporary  exclusion  from  office  to  his  connivance  at  this  traffic.6 
In  1680  we  find  the  Proprietors  appointing  a  commission  to  pre- 
vent slavery,  to  investigate  quarrels  between  the  settlers  and  the 
Indians,  and  to  reward  the  friendly  tribes.  Two  years  later  this 
commission  was  abolished  on  the  ground  that  it  was  used  not  for 
the  protection  but  for  the  oppression  of  the  natives.7 

These  and  other  phases  in  the  life  of  the  colony  serve  to  illus- 

1  Rivers,  p.  105.  2  lb.,  p.  125.  3  lb.,  p.  126. 

*  Moreton's  instructions,  May,  1682,  Entiy  Book,  No.  xxii. 

5  The  most  forcible  of  all  these  is  addressed  to  Colleton  in  1690.     It  speaks  of  "  the  perni- 
cious, inhuman,  barbarous  practice  which  we  are. resolved  to  break." 

6  Oldmixon,  in  Carroll,  vol.  ii.  p.  407. 

7  Instructions  to  the  Governor  of  Charlestown,  May,  1680.     Entry  Book,  No.  xxii. 


CONDUCT  'OF  THE  PROPRIETORS. 


36: 


trate  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  supervision  bestowed  by  the 
Aftivity  of  Proprietors.  Among  them,  Shaftesbury,  as  might  have 
bury.  been  expected,  stands  out  conspicuous  for  his  energy 

and  versatility.  It  is  almost  startling  to  find  the  foremost  states- 
man of  the  age  interesting  himself  in  the  fate  of  two  young 
scamps  who  had  fled  from  their  parents  to  the  plantations,1  giving 
minute  instructions  to  his  agent,  Woodward,  to  guide  him  in  his 
search  for  mines,  and  telling  him  to  conceal  any  discoveries  that 
he  might  make  by  calling  gold  antimony,  and  silver  tin,  in  his 
dispatches.2 

In  1674,  disappointed  probably  by  the  unprofitable  results  of 
the  settlement  at  Charlestown,  Shaftesbury  established  a  small  in- 
dependent colony  of  his  own,  twenty  miles  farther  south,  a  vent- 
ure which  only  ended  in  disappointment,  seemingly  through  the 
dishonesty  of  Percival,  who  was  placed  at  the  head  of  it.3 

In  many  respects  the  temper  and  conduct  of  the  Proprietors 
remind  us  of  the  leaders  of  the  Virginia  Company.  But  it  is 
Dissensions  clear  that  their  whole  range  of  motives  was  lower,  and 
thVcoio1-  that  hopes  of  commercial  profit  had  a  far  larger  share 
JhVpro^  m  determining  their  conduct.  To  men  who  looked 
pnetors.  mainly  to  the  commercial  profit  of  their  undertaking, 
the  state  of  the  colony  after  twelve  years  could  not  but  be  a  dis- 
appointment. The  settlers  could  not  do  more  than  produce 
enough  for  their  own  wants ;  there  seemed  no  prospect  of  a  lucra- 
tive export  trade,  and  the  only  source  of  revenue  was  the  quit- 
rents.  Nor  was  the  unprofitable  state  of  the  colony  the  only 
subject  of  complaint  with  the  Proprietors.  In  addition  to  the 
kidnapping  of  Indians  and  connivance,  at  piracy,  the  settlers  gave 
active  encouragement  and  assistance  to  smugglers.4  The  forfeit- 
ure of  charters,  which  was  such  a  conspicuous  feature  of  the  two 
last  Stuart  reigns,  might  well  make  the  Proprietors  look  with 
dread  on  anything  which  gave  the  colony  a  bad  name  as  a  centre 

1  Letter  in  the  Shaftesbury  Papers,  June,  1672. 

2  Shaftesbury  Papers,  1671.  It  is  noteworthy  that  Woodward,  writing  to  Shaftesbury  in 
1674,  says  that  he  has  found  in  his  journeyings  westward  a  substance  which  "  glittered  like 
antimony." 

3  Rivers,  p.  121.  Percival's  instructions  are  in  the  Shaftesbury  Papers.  His  dishonesty 
is  stated  in  a  letter  to  Shaftesbury  from  one  Wilson.     Shaftesbury  Papers,  December,  1683. 

4  Report  from  Muschamp,  the  king's  collector  of  customs,  to  the  Board  of  Trade  in  1687. 
In  the  next  year  a  private  letter  from  a  sea-captain  named  Spragg  accuses  the  Governor  of 
Carolina  of  conniving  with  smugglers.  This  may  refer  either  to  North  or  South  Carolina, 
Edmund  Randolph,  in  a  report  to  the  Board  of  Trade  in  1695,  recommends  that  North  Caro- 
lina be  annexed  to  Virginia,  and  South  Carolina  united  with  the  Bahamas  as  a  single  prov- 
ince under  the  crown.     This,  he  says,  is  the  only  way  to  check  piracy  and  smuggling. 


362 


THE  TWO  CAROTIN  AS. 


of  anarchy  and  disorder.  For  the  same  reason  they  viewed  with 
disfavor  the  wish  of  the  legislature  to  bar  the  recovery  of  debts 
contracted  beyond  the  limits  of  the  colony. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  colonists  had  their  own  grievances 
against  the  Proprietors.  Though  no  attempt  had  been  made  to 
apply  the  Fundamental  Constitutions,  yet  the  dread  of  them 
hung  over  the  colony  and  begot  a  general  sense  of  uncertainty 
and  distrust.  The  Proprietors  insisted  on  receiving  the  quit-rents 
in  money  instead  of  in  kind.  Their  conduct,  too,  in  withholding 
the  colonists  from  taking  their  revenge  upon  the  Spaniards,  long 
ranked  as  a  grievance.  There  were  also  internal  dissensions 
among  the  settlers  which  served  to  beget  a  general  sense  of 
disaffection  and  discontent.  Great  as  were  the  advantages  which 
the  colony  derived  from  the  possession  of  a  capital  city,  it  brought 
drawbacks  as  well.  There  was  as  yet  no  local  representation, 
but  the  whole  body  of  freeholders  met  at  Charlestown,  and  there 
elected  the  full  complement  of  representatives.  As  the  outlying 
counties  grew  in  importance,  the  inhabitants  resented  the  necessity 
of  coming  to  Charlestown  to  vote  for  representatives.1  Another 
grievance  was  the  favor  shown  by  the  Proprietors  to  Cardross 
and  his  Scotch  followers.2  Still  more  unworthy  was  the  jealousy 
felt  towards  the  French  Huguenots,  who  were  among  the  most 
industrious  and  enterprising  inhabitants  of  the  colony.  The 
English  settlers  caviled  at  their  claim  to  equal  representation,  and 
even  sought  to  deny  them  civil  rights  and  freedom  of  worship.3 

It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  at  the  very  time  when  the  relations 
between  the  Proprietors  and  the  settlers  were  in  this  state,  the 
Right  of  latter  included  in  their  instructions  to  their  Governor  a 
tfon. axa"  specific  instruction  not  to  pass  any  Act  for  raising 
money  except  by  consent  of  a  majority  of  the  representatives. 
Thus,  as  in  Virginia  and  Maryland,  the  exclusive  right  of  taxa- 
tion was  clearly  conceded  to  the  settlers,  and  that  at  a  time  when 
there  was  no  special  inclination  to  treat  them  with  favor.4 

In  1 68 1,  these  smouldering  elements  of  discontent  were  kindled 
into  a  flame  by  the  appointment  as  Governor  of  Colleton,  a  land- 
Rebeiiion  grave,  and  brother  to  one  of  the  Proprietors.  By  his 
ConT/pn.      hasty  and  arbitrary  conduct  he  gave  the  malcontents 

1  Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  xxii.  p.  169. 

2  This  is  set  forth  in  an  undated  memorial  presented  by  the  people  of  Charlestown  to  the 
Proprietors.     It  is  in  the  Shajtesbnry  Papers. 

8  Rivers,  p.  176.     Mr.  Rivers,  though  accurate  and  trustworthy,  is  so  far  favorable  to  the 
popular  party  that  he  may  be  taken  as  an  unexceptionable  witness  against  them. 
*  Colleton's  Instructions.     Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  xxii. 


REBELLION  AGAINST  COLLETON. 


363 


the  opportunity  which  they  sought.  His  severity  in  punishing 
a  clergyman  by  a  fine  of  a  hundred  pounds  and  imprisonment 
for  a  seditious  sermon,  brought  upon  him  the  rebuke  of  the  Pro- 
prietors.1 But  his  most  fatal  error  was  falling  into  the  snare 
deliberately  set  for  him  by  the  disaffected  faction.  If  we  may 
believe  the  Proprietors,  the  party  who  were  hostile  to  them  per- 
suaded Colleton  to  impose  an  excise,  promising  that  the  proceeds 
should  be  applied  to  his  own  maintenance.  In  his  attempts  to 
carry  this  he  deprived  some  deputies  of  their  seats  and  made  en- 
emies of  others.2  Urged  by  a  request,  proceeding  in  all  proba- 
bility from  the  same  faction,  he  proclaimed  martial  law  on  the 
feeble  pretext  of  a  threatened  Spanish  invasion.3 

At  this  juncture  Sothel  appeared  in  the  colony.  Unabashed 
by  his  failure  and  disgrace  in  North  Carolina,  he  alleged  that  his 
position  as  a  Proprietor  gave  him  a  claim  to  the  governorship' 
prior  to  that  of  Colleton.  The  disaffected  party  at  once  saw  the 
importance  of  enlisting  him.  A  number  of  them  drew  up  and 
presented  to  him  a  long,  ill-composed,  and  almost  unintelligible 
address  bringing  a  variety  of  charges  against  the  Governor.4 
Sothel  at  once  took  up  the  side  of  the  disaffected,  deposed  sev- 
eral of  the  Proprietors'  deputies,  and  summoned  a  Parliament  in 
obedience  to  a  petition  signed  by  about  five  hundred  of  the 
inhabitants.  This  new  legislature  banished  Colleton  and  deprived 
his  chief  supporters  of  their  offices.  The  Proprietors,  as  soon  as 
they  heard  of  these  proceedings,  wrote  a  letter  of  remonstrance 
to  Sothel,  telling  him  that  his  position  as  one  of  them  gave  him 
no  claim  to  the  governorship,  and  that  any  exercise  of  power  by 
himself  or  those  whom  he  had  appointed  to  inferior  offices  would 
be  a  rebellion.  Sothel  yielded  and  retired  into  private  life,  leav- 
ing the  Proprietors  to  nominate  a  Governor.  The  result  was  not 
unlike  that  of  Culpepper's  rebellion  in  North  Carolina.  The 
rebels  had  given  way  and  the  Proprietors  had  formally  asserted 
their  authority.  Yet  in  each  case  an  unpopular  official  had  been 
removed,  no  punishment  had  overtaken  the  offenders,  and  the 
precedent  established  had  been  unfavorable  to  the  dignity  and 
authority  of  the  Proprietors. 

In  the  place  of  Colleton  the  Proprietors  appointed  to  the  gov- 
ernorship Philip  Ludwell,  who  had  so  long  played  a  conspicuous 

1  Their  remonstrance  is  published  in  full  by  Mr.  Rivers,  p.  410. 

2  This  is  stated  in  the  Proprietors'  instructions  to  Ludwell.     Entry  Book,  No.  Jixii.  p.  223. 

3  Memorial  to  Sothel,  Rivers,  p.  423. 

4  This  memorial  and  the  Proprietors'  letter  to  Sothel  are  both  given  in  full  by  Mr.  Rivers. 


364  THE  TWO  CAROLINAS. 

part  in  Virginian  politics.  His  wealth  and  consequence  had 
recently  been  increased  by  a  marriage  with  the  widow  of  Sir 
Ludweii  William  Berkeley.1  Sobriety,  moderation,  and  compro- 
Governor.  mise  had  been  his  characteristics  in  Virginia,  and  he 
carried  the  same  spirit  into  his  new  office.  His  anxiety  to  propi- 
tiate the  settlers  led  him  to  relax  the  conditions  of  land  tenure. 
He  also  gave  his  consent  to  various  laws  which  were  peculiarly 
offensive  to  the  Proprietors.  One  of  these  introduced  a  peculiar 
system  of  appointing  juries  by  dividing  the  whole  country  into 
groups  of  twelve  persons  and  choosing  two  out  of  each  group. 
Under  this  system  it  was  possible  for  a  sheriff  to  make  sure  be- 
forehand of  the  views  of  at  least  two  persons  on  each  jury.  The 
other  Act  so  relaxed  the  qualification  for  voters  as  to  admit  per- 
sons who  were  in  no  strict  sense  inhabitants  of  the  colony.  Lud-  - 
well  also  seems  to  have  shown  some  sympathy  with  that  party 
who,  by  a  harsh  application  of  the  marriage  laws,  and  of  the 
municipal  regulations  for  the  conduct  of  public  worship,  sought 
to  harass  the  French  Huguenots.  These  matters  were  made  the 
subject  of  a  reproof  from  the  Proprietors,  and  in  all  probability 
led  to  Ludwell's  removal  in  1694.2 

His  successor,  Smyth,  fared  even  worse.  Finding  it  impossible 
to  satisfy  both  the  Proprietors  and  the  settlers,  he  resigned  his  of- 
Archdaie  fice  and  left  the  colony.  His  parting  communication 
Governor,  to  the  Proprietors  represented  the  necessity  of  sending 
out  one  of  their  own  body  as  Governor.  The  suggestion  was 
accepted,  and  John  Archdale,  a  Quaker,  who  had  recently  ac- 
quired a  proprietorship  by  purchase,  was  appointed  to  the  vacant 
post.3 

His  instructions  allowed  him  to  sweep  away  one  of  the  chief 
causes  of  disaffection  by  settling  all  disputes  concerning  land  at 
his  own  discretion.  He  was  also  empowered  to  place  the  settlers 
for  the  first  time  in  the  position  of  owners  instead  of  tenants,  by 
selling  land  at  fixed  prices,  varying  with  its  proximity  to  Charles- 
town.  Furthermore,  he  was  to  inquire  into  the  views  of  the 
people  upon  the  Fundamental  Constitutions,  and  to  recommend 
such  modifications  as  might  win  public  favor.4 

1  I  cannot  ascertain  the  exact  date  of  this  marriage.     It  is  more  than  once  referred  to  in  the 
Colonial  Papers. 

2  Rivers,  p.  163.     The  remonstrance  from  the  Proprietors  to  Ludwell  is  published  in  full, 
p.  436. 

3  Archdale,  in  Carroll,  vol.  ii.  p.  101. 

4  His  instructions  are  in  the  Carolina  Papers,  January,  1694. 


ARCHDALE  AND  BLAKE  AS  GOVERNORS.  365 

His  tenure  of  orifice,  extending  over  two  years,  has  left  behind 
a  vague  tradition  of  beneficence  and  ability  hardly  justified  by 
the  substantial  result.  His  kindly  and  conciliatory  temper,  his 
anxiety  to  deal  fairly  by  all  men,  Englishmen  and  Spaniards, 
whites  and  Indians  alike,  qualities  brought  into  full  relief  by  the 
recent  attitude  of  the  other  Proprietors,  allayed  discontent,  but 
did  little  to  bridge  over  the  ever-growing  gulf  which  separated 
the  interests  of  the  Proprietors  from  those  of  the  settlers.1 

The  next  Governor,  Blake,  walked  in  the  footsteps  of  his  pred- 
ecessor. The  pacific  spirit  introduced  by  Archdale  is  illustrated 
by  two  of  the  principal  measures  passed  during  Blake's  adminis- 
tration. Freedom  of  worship  was  granted  to  all  Christians,  Pap- 
ists only  excepted,2  and  the  state  of  the  Huguenots  was  bettered 
by  an  enactment  which  made  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  crown 
the  only  test  of  citizenship.3 

The  last  modification  of  the  Fundamental  Constitutions  was 
another  measure  of  conciliation.  The  Assembly  endeavored  to 
obtain  even  further  concessions.  They  petitioned  for  a  remission 
of  duties,  for  the  right  of  coining,  and  for  the  limitation  of  all 
grants  of  land  to  a  thousand  acres.4  There  is  nothing  to  show 
that  the  Proprietors  acceded,  or  even  listened  to  their  petition. 

The  political  history  of  South  Carolina  now  enters  on  a  new 
phase.  Hitherto  there  had  been  a  spirit  of  opposition,  at  times 
The  High  dormant,  at  times  breaking  into  open  hostility,  between 
PartyC.  the  Proprietors  and  the  settlers.     Now  a  third  force 

came  into  play.  A  party  began  to  take  an  active  share  in  the 
politics  of  the  colony,  consisting  of  a  small  knot  of  greedy,  self- 
seeking  adventurers,  not  bound  to  the  Proprietors  by  any  real 
tie  of  loyalty  or  even  of  common  interest,  but  using  the  proprie- 
tary authority  as  a  pretext  and  instrument  for  their  own  ends.5 
The  chief  object  which,  ostensibly  at  least,  bound  this  party  to- 
gether, and  provided  a  common  ground  of  action,  was  the  pre- 
dominance of  the  Anglican  Church.  That  this  should  have  been 
so  is  a  significant  illustration  of  the  change  which  twenty  years 
had  brought  about.     The  High  Churchman  of  1690  may  have 

1  Rivers,  p.  184.     Archdale,  pp.  94,  106. 

2  Cooper,  vol.  ii.  p.  131.  3  Rivers,  p.  186. 

4  Rivers,  p.  441.  Mr.  Rivers  interprets  this  petition  as  an  application  to  be  emancipated 
from  the  operation  of  Acts  of  Parliament,  a  conclusion  in  which  I  cannot  agree. 

5  The  growth  of  this  party  is  clearly  traced  by  Mr.  Rivers.  Our  knowledge  of  its  proceed- 
ings is  mainly  derived  from  Archdale,  from  a  pamphlet  published  in  17S6,  entitled  The  Case 
of  the  Protestant  Dissenters  in  Carolina,  attributed  to  Defoe,  and  from  Oldmixon,  who  now 
becomes  an  authority  of  some  value 


366 


THE  TWO  CAROLINA  S. 


been  servile  and  narrow-minded,  but  he  was  at  least  true  to  his 
professions,  and  sin  in  high  places  met  with  no  quarter  from  men 
like  Ken  and  Sancroft.  The  High  Churchman  of  17 10  was  not 
alienated  by  the  ribaldry  and  cynicism  of  Swift,  by  the  unbelief 
and  profligacy  of  Bolingbroke. 

In  Carolina,  as  in  England,  the  struggle  of  parties  turned  on 
the  question  of  conformity,  and  in  neither  case  had  orthodoxy 
any  cause  to  be  proud  of  her  advocates.  The  leader  of  this  party 
in  the  colony  was  Nicholas  Trott,  who  was  sent  out  by  the  Pro- 
prietors in  1697.  He  was  appointed  to  the  office  of  Chief  Justice, 
but  to  this  he  added  the  general  duties  of  an  agent  for  the  Pro- 
prietors, with  instructions  to  make  certain  recommendations  to 
the  Assembly  and  to  report  on  the  trade  and  finances  of  the  col- 
ony.1 His  industry  and  energy  are  shown  by  the  fact  that  he 
found  time  amid  his  official  duties  to  make  and  publish  collections, 
not  only  of  the  laws  of  his  own  colony,  but  also  of  the  ecclesias- 
tical laws  existing  in  the  various  other  settlements.  Allied  with 
him  was  James  Moore,  an  ambitious,  unscrupulous  man,  not  lack- 
ing in  the  qualities  of  a  partisan  leader,  either  in  the  field  or  in 
political'  life. 

We  first  trace  the  action  of  this  party  after  the  death  of  Blake, 
in  1 70 1.  The  Council  thereupon  conferred  the  governorship 
upon  Moreton,  the  senior  landgrave,  subject  to  the  approval  of 
the  Proprietors.  Moore  objected  to  this  election  on  the  ground 
that  Moreton  held  a  commission  from  King  William  as  a  judge 
of  the  Admiralty.  The  Council,  taking,  as  it  would  seem,  the 
view  that  this  commission  gave  Moreton  an  interest  opposed 
to  that  of  the  Proprietors,  annulled  the  election  and  substituted 
Moore.2  The  Governor  thus  appointed  packed  the  Council,  it  is 
said,  with  his  own  creatures,  and  by  bribing  the  returning  officers 
to  poll  a  number  of  unqualified  voters,  secured  the  election  of  an 
Assembly  composed  largely  of  his  own  partisans.3 

Meanwhile  a  crisis  was  at  hand  which  gave  an  agitator  like 
Moore  the  opportunity  he  needed.  War  between  England  and 
invasion  of  Spain,  though  not  yet  declared,  was  by  this  time  cer- 
Fiorida.4      tain.     We  are  now  fast  approaching  the  age  when  the 

1  His  instructions  are  in  the  Carolina  Papers  for  1697. 

2  Oldmixon,  in  Carroll,  p.  418.  3  lb.,  p.  420. 

4  The  chief  authority  for  this  invasion,  commonly  called  in  the  colony  Queen  Anne's  War, 
is  an  official  report,  published  by  a  committee  in  1740,  on  the  occasion  of  General  Oglethorpe's 
attack  on  St.  Augustine,  and  republished  in  Carroll,  vol.  ii.  p.  348.  The  account  is  supple- 
mented and  confirmed  by  Oldmixon  and  Archdale. 


WAR  WITH  SPAIN. 


367 


battles  of  the  great  European  powers  were  fought  out  on  the 
banks  of  the  Ohio  and  Lake  Erie,  and  when  the  war-cry  was 
raised,  and  the  tomahawk  wielded  amid  peaceful  American  set- 
tlements at  the  bidding  of  a  diplomatist  in  London  or  Madrid. 
The  old  foes,  Charlestown  and  St.  Augustine,  anticipated  the  sig- 
nal from  Europe.  Before  war  had  been  formally  declared  nine 
hundred  Apalachian  Indians  under  a  Spanish  leader  were  on 
their  way  to  invade  the  English  settlement.  The  wisdom  of 
meeting  invasion  by  invasion  may  be  doubted,  but  it  is  hardly 
fair  to  set  down  the  warlike  policy  of  South  Carolina  as  solely 
dictated  by  the  personal  ambition  and  covetousness  of  Moore. 
The  Spanish  attack  was  thwarted  by  rousing  the  Creek  Indians, 
through  whose  territory  the  invading  force  had  to  march.  The 
Creeks  were  inferior  in  number,  but  their  strategy  made  amends 
for  this  j  the  Apalachian  force  met  with  a  crushing  defeat,  and 
the  colonists  were  left  to  deal  only  with  their  civilized  enemies. 
In  September  the  invading  force  marched  from  Charlestown. 
It  consisted  of  a  hundred  settlers  and  eight  hundred  Indians, 
with  Moore  himself  at  their  head.  The  result  was  a  failure,  ludi- 
crous in  its  completeness.  The  town  of  St.  Augustine  being  un- 
fortified, at  once  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  English,  and  the  in- 
habitants with  their  most  valuable  goods  took  refuge  in  an  ad- 
jacent fort,  to  which  Moore  laid  siege.  Unluckily  it  does  not 
seem  to  have  occurred  to  the  English  leaders  that  artillery  was 
needful  for  an  attacking  force.  The  Governor  and  his  troops  had 
to  sit  idle  before  St.  Augustine  till  cannon  were  brought  from  Ja- 
maica. Before  they  could  arrive,  two  Spanish  vessels,  one  of 
twenty-two,  the  other  of  sixteen  guns,  appeared  off  St.  Augustine. 
Moore  thereupon  raised  the  siege,  burned  the  town  and  his  own 
ships,  and  retreated  to  Charlestown.  The  only  results  of  the  ex- 
pedition were  the  loss  of  two  men,  the  enrichment  of  Moore  by 
the  church  plate  of  St.  Augustine  and  some  slaves,  and  a  burden 
six  thousand  pounds  debt  imposed  on  the  colony.  The  ill  feel- 
g  thus  engendered  was  imbittered  by  a  conflict  between  the  two 
houses,  in  which  the  Governor  and  Council  exercised  their  right  of 
veto  against  a  bill  passed  by  the  representatives.  This  dispute  cul- 
minated in  a  riot  in  which  the  partisans  of  the  Governor  disgraced 
themselves  by  various  outrages  and  by  brutal  assaults  on  their 
opponents.1 

1  This  riot  is  described  in  a  memorial  addressed  by  several  members  of  the  Assembly  to  the 
Palatine.     Published  by  Mr.  Rivers,  p.  4.33. 


368  THE  TWO  CAROLINA S. 

This,  however,  was  the  concluding  scene  of  Moore's  usurped 
and  misused  authority.  In  1702  the  Proprietors  nominated  Sir 
Sir  Nathaniel  Johnson  as  Governor.     The  chief  effect  on 

T^h^on*61  l^e  Pontics  of  tne  colony  was  that  the  party  of  Trott 
Governor.  and  Moore  acquired  a  leader  who  enjoyed  the  confi- 
dence and  support  of  the  Proprietors,  and  who  was  personally  a 
man  of  ability,  courage,  good  character  and  popular  manners. 
Moore  was  appointed  Attorney-General,  and  this,  coupled  with 
the  position  of  Trott  as  Chief  Justice,  made  it  certain  that  the 
policy  of  the  late  official  party  would  still  be  in  force.  This  was 
confirmed  by  the  conduct  of  the  next  election,  when  unqualified 
voters,  slaves,  both  black  and  white,  and  sailors  whose  vessels 
chanced  to  be  in  Charlestown  harbor,  voted  for  the  followers  of 
the  government,  which  was  furthermore  strengthened  by  the  sup- 
port of  the  Huguenots,  whom  the  bigotry  of  the  popular  party 
had  alienated.1 

Johnson  carried  on  Moore's  policy  against  the  Spaniards,  but 
in  a  more  efficient  manner.  Instead  of  organizing  a  regular  ex-. 
Second  pedition  against  St.  Augustine,  he  sent  out  a  force  un- 
Fior?da"°  der  the  late  Governor,  consisting  of  a  thousand  Indians 
and  fifty  English,  to  make  a  raid  on  the  Spanish  territory.  One 
small  settlement  after  another  fell  before  their  attack,  and  Moore 
returned  to  Charlestown  like  an  Armstrong  or  Johnstone  from  a 
border  foray,  laden  with  plunder  and  driving  before  him,  not  a 
herd  of  cattle,  but  a  gang  of  slaves. 

This  attack  had  the  desired  effect  of  crippling  the  enemy  and 
withholding  him  from  hostilities.  For  three  years  no  attempt 
Siege  of  was  made  at  retaliation.  At  length,  in  August,  1706, 
town.3  "  a  privateer  came  full  sail  into  Charlestown  harbor  to 
give  warning  that  an  allied  French  and  Spanish  fleet  was  threat- 
ening the  colony.  Three  times  has  Charlestown  been  attacked 
from  the  sea.  Twice  in  the  last  century  and  once  in  the  present 
have  the  ever-growing  resources  of  naval  warfare  been  brought  to 
bear  upon  her  walls.  Dahlgren's  monitors  were  as  powerless 
against  her  mighty  natural  defenses  as  the  French  privateers  or 
as  Parker's  men-of-war,  and  the  stronghold  of  slavery  only  sank. 

1  Oldmixon,  p.  429. 

2  Moore's  own  report  of  this  expedition,  in  a  report  addressed  to  the  Governor,  is  published 
in  Carroll,  vol.  ii.  p.  574. 

8  There  are  two  reports  of  this  attack,  neither  of  them  signed,  in  the  Colonial  Papers.  One 
is  dated  August,  1706,  the  other  is  undated.  They  confirm  Mr.  Rivers's  account,  based  on  a 
contemporary  report  published  in  the  Boston  News-letter,  and  republished  in  1766.  The 
report  of  the  committee  above  quoted  also  has  some  value  as  confirmatory  evidence. 


DEFENSE  OF  CHARLES  TOWN. 


369 


in  the  common  downfall  of  that  cause  of  which  she  was  herself 
the  parent  and  leader.  But  of  the  three  defenses  of  Charles- 
town,  all  marked  by  conspicuous  resolution  on  the  part  of  the 
garrison,  the  first  is  the  only  one  with  which  Englishmen  can 
well  feel  sympathy.  In  each  of  the  latter  sieges  the  assailants 
and  the  defenders  were  of  the  same  race  and  speech.  The  set- 
tlers who  held  Charlestown  against  the  allied  forces  of  France 
and  Spain  were  partners  in  the  glory  of  Stanhope  and  Marlbor- 
ough, heirs  to  the  glory  of  Drake  and  Raleigh. 

Nature  as  well  as  man  fought  against  the  city.  Yellow  fever 
had  for  the  first  time  broken  out  in  the  settlement,  and  nearly  all 
the  inhabitants  had  betaken  themselves  to  the  comparative  secu- 
rity of  the  country.  Yet,  weakened  as  his  forces  were,  the  stout 
heart  of  the  Governor  never  wavered.  A  summons  to  surrender 
was  met  with  a  peremptory  refusal.  Isolated  attacks  were  then 
made  on  the  various  outlying  islands  and  headlands  which  guard 
the  harbor,  but  the  assailants  were  beaten  off  with  scarcely  any  loss 
among  the  besiegers.  On  the  next  day  a  small  fleet  under  Colonel 
Rhett  was  sent  out  to  attack  the  invaders.  The  enemy's  fleet 
never  even  exchanged  fire,  but  set  sail,  escaping  pursuit  through 
the  roughness  of  the  weather.  One  isolated  vessel  which  had 
been  detached  from  the  rest  of  the  fleet  with  a  force  of  two  hun- 
dred men  on  board,  anchored  in  Sewee  Bay,  twenty  miles  north- 
east of  Charlestown,  where  it  was  at  once  surrounded  and  cap- 
tured, raising  the  whole  number  of  prisoners  to  two  hundred  and 
thirty.  This  success,  equally  honorable  to  the  Governor  and  to 
the  colonists,  did  something  to  heal  the  breach  between  them. 
The  Governor  formally  thanked  the  citizens  for  having  forgotten 
their  political  dissensions  in  face  of  the  common  enemy,  while 
they  on  their  part  acknowledged  his  services  by  a  gift  of  land. 

The  friendly  relations  thus  established  were  soon  interrupted. 
In  the  autumn  of  1701,  the  post  of  Palatine  had  devolved  on 
Attempts  Lord  Granville.  He  was  an  energetic  member  of  the 
con?of°mCity.  new  High  Church  party  which  was  now  struggling  to 
crush  the  civil  liberties  of  the  Dissenters  by  the  Bill  for  prevent- 
ing Occasional  Conformity.1  Hitherto  the  Dissenters  in  Caro- 
lina had  enjoyed  ample  liberty,  the  result  rather  of  the  absence 
of  religious  ordinances  than  of  any  rational  toleration.  It  is  clear 
that  there,  as  in  the  other  southern  colonies,  the  social  life  and 
temper  of  the  settlers,  and  the  peculiarities  of  the  country,  in- 

1  Oldmixon,  p.  418. 

24 


370  THE  TWO  CARCLINAS. 

duced  an  almost  universal  neglect  of  religion.  In  Charlestown 
things  were  better  than  in  the  country.  There  the  liberality  of 
Blake,  himself  a  Nonconformist,  had  induced  the  settlers  to  vote 
an  endowment  of  a  hundred  and  fifty  pounds  a  year,  with  a  house 
and  glebe,  to  a  minister  of  the  Church  of  England.1  Three 
years  later  the  zeal  of  Bray  established  a  public  library  at  Charles - 
town.2 

But  these  measures  tor  advancing  the  Church  had  been  at- 
tended with  no  injustice  to  Dissenters.  As  we  have  seen,  in  1696, 
an  Act  of  the  Assemblv  secured  freedom  of  conscience  to  all 
Christians,  Papists  only  excepted.  Early  in  the  next  century  the 
Dissenters  claimed  to  be  no  less  than  two-thirds  of  the  popula- 
tion.3 This  we  may  doubt,  as  it  is  difficult  to  understand  how  a 
minority  could  force  a  measure  on  a  reluctant  majority,  even  if 
we  suppose,  which  is  in  itself  uniikely,  that  the  minority  was  com- 
pletely united  within  itself.  But  we  may  at  least  be  sure  that  the 
Dissenters  formed  an  influential  body  in  the  colony,  and  that 
any  attempt  to  override  their  liberties  was  at  once  unjust  and  un- 
wise. 

Nevertheless  the  Assembly,  in  May,  1704,  passed  a  Bill  enforc- 
ing the  oath  of  Conformity  and  the  reception  of  the  Sacrament 
as  necessary  conditions  of  membership.  The  injustice  of  this 
Bill  was  enhanced  by  a  clause  providing  that  if  the  candidate 
elected  should  refuse  these  tests,  a  fresh  writ  should  not  issue, 
but  the  next  candidate  on  the  sheriff's  list  should  be  elected.4 

Two  years  later  an  Act  was  passed  establishing  a  lay  commis- 
sion for  the  control  of  ecclesiastical  affairs,  and  thereby  supersed- 
ing the  jurisdiction  which  the  Bishop  of  London  hitherto  pos- 
sessed and  could  at  any  time  exercise  through  a  commissary.5  It 
is  said  that  this  measure  was  intended  as  an  instrument  against  a 
specially  obnoxious  minister  who  was  in  the  habit  of  denouncing 
the  Governor  and  his  party  from  the  pulpit,  and  who  was  at  once 
deprived  by  the  newiy  appointed  tribunal.6  It  may  also  have 
been  due  to  the  fact  that  in  that  age  more  liberality  of  thought 
was  to  be  found  among  the  higher  clergy  than  among  the  ortho- 
dox laity. 

The  defeated  party  did  not  give  way  without  a  further  strug- 

1  Archdale,  p.  113.     Trott'*  Liius  of  South  Carolina,  vol.  i.  p.  66. 

2  Trott's  Ecclesiastical  Laws,  p.  1. 
8  Case  of  Dissenters,  p.  16. 

4  Cooper,  vol.  ii.  p.  232.  e  Cooper,  vol.  ii.  p.  282.     Rivers,  p.  220. 

6  Case  of  Dissenters,  p.  24. 


ATTEMPTS  TO  ENFORCE  CONFORMITY.  37 x 

gle.  At  the  autumn  session  of  1706  the  question  was  reopened. 
Members  who  had  been  absent  from  the  former  division  were 
now  in  their  places;  the  balance  of  parties  was  changed,  and  the 
Assembly  voted  the  repeal  of  the  obnoxious  Bill.  The  Governor 
and  Council,  however,  asserted  their  powers  of  veto,  and  the  Bill 
still  remained  law.  The  Assembly  was  then  dissolved.1  As  the 
next  one  was  elected  under  the  new  Act,  there  could  be  little 
doubt  as  to  its  composition.  By  way  of  insuring,  as  far  as  might 
be,  the  perpetuity  of  the  system  just  established,  this  Assembly 
passed  a  law  securing  itself  against  dissolution  for  at  least  two 
years,  and  for  eighteen  months  after  the  death  or  recall  of  the 
present  Governor.2  The  preamble  of  this  Bill  left  no  doubt  as  to 
the  motives  of  its  advocates,  since  it  set  forth  as  its  objects  the 
interest  and  preservation  of  the  Church  of  England. 

But  meanwhile  the  efforts  of  the  dominant  party  met  with  more 
effectual  opposition  from  another  quarter.  The  Nonconformists 
The  Con-  and  those  who  sympathized  with  them  had  at  once 
Biirie^oed  sent  an  agent  to  England  to  lay  their  case  before  the 
crown.  Proprietors.  The  person  first  selected,  Joseph  Ash, 
died  soon  after  his  arrival.3  A  second  agent,  Boon,  was  then 
sent.  His  attempts  to  win  over  the  Proprietors  were  utterly  use- 
less against  the  stubborn  and  narrow-minded  Palatine.4  Else- 
where he  was  more  successful.  The  clause  appointing  lay  com- 
missioners furnished  a  ground  on  which  orthodox  Churchmen 
might  legitimately  oppose  the  Bill.  The  Society  for  the  Propa- 
gation of  the  Gospel,  to  which  the  American  colonies  in  their 
early  days  owed  so  much,  took  up  the  matter  and  refused  to  send 
out  any  missionaries  or  to  give  any  help  to  the  church  of  Caro- 
lina till  the  measure  was  withdrawn.5  Aid  was  at  hand  from  a 
yet  mol  potent  quarter.  The  Lords,  then,  as  more  than  once 
in  our  history,  the  defenders  of  justice  and  moderation  against  a 
blind  and  fanatical  majority,  laid  before  the  queen  an  address, 
setting  forth  the  evil  consequences  which  the  Act  would  bring 
upon  the  colony,  and  the  inconsistency  of  such  a,  measure  with 
the  first  principles  of  the  Carolina  Charter.6  The  queen  then  re- 
ferred the  matter  to  the  Board  of  Trade.  Their  report  recom-. 
mended  not  merely  the  annulment  of  the  Act  but  the  forfeiture 

1  Trott's  Ecclesiastical  Laws,  p.  41. 

2  Statutes  quoted  in  Rivers,  p.  227.  3  Oldmixon,  p.  431.  4  lb.,  p.  436. 

5  Oldmixon,  p.  437. 

6  This  address  is  given  in  full  by  Oldmixon,  p.  436.     He  also  reports  the  subsequent  action 
of  the  Board  of  Trade  and  the  crown. 


372  THE  TWO  CAROLINAS. 

of  the  Charter.  The  former  recommendation  was  accepted,  and 
on  the  ioth  of  June,  1706,  the  royal  veto  negatived  the  Act. 
This  action  of  the  crown  was  important  from  more  than  one  point 
of  view.  It  prevented  a  measure  which  would  have  been  well- 
nigh  fatal  to  all  true  religious  life  within  the  colony.  In  its  imme- 
diate result  it  allayed  a  struggle  which  might  have  precipitated 
and  imbittered  the  impending  overthrow  of  the  Proprietary  gov- 
ernment. 

But  though  the  repeal  may  have  saved  the  Proprietors  from 
themselves,  in  another  way  it  struck  a  heavy  blow  at  their  au- 
thority. If  the  Proprietors  were  to  be  subject  to  the  control  of 
the  crown,  not  merely  in  questions  of  imperial  interest,  but  in  a 
matter  of  internal  government,  they  at  once  sank  from  the  posi- 
tion of  sovereigns  to  that  of  mere  landholders. 

The  victorious  party  used  its  triumph  with  moderation.  In- 
deed, we  may  be  almost  sure  from  what  followed  that  parties 
Church  were  fairly  balanced,  and  that  opposition  to  the  Qon- 
ment  Aft."  formity  Acts  did  not  imply  antagonism  to  the  Church. 
An  Act  was  passed  for  laying  out  parishes  and  for  raising  money 
towards  the  building  of  churches  and  the  permanent  endowment 
of  the  clergy.1  The  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel 
showed  its  good-will  to  the  colony  not  merely  by  supporting  the 
Church,  but  by  its  care  for  education.  A  grammar  school  was 
founded  and  endowed,  and  it  is  a  characteristic  illustration  of  the 
state  of  the  colony  that  in  the  provision  made  for  the  school- 
master, slaves  are  mentioned  as  a  part  of  his  chattels.2 

The  temporary  restoration  of  harmony  was  confirmed  by  the 
death  of  Granville.  His  place  was  filled  by  Lord  Craven,  one 
Charles  of  whose  first  acts  was  to  appoint  his  brother,  Charles 
Governor.  Craven,  to  the  governorship.  In  him  for  the  first  time 
:South  Carolina  possessed  a  Governor  endowed  with  wisdom  and 
public  spirit,  representing  the  views  and  interests  of  the  Proprie- 
tors, yet  trusted  and  beloved  by  the  people,  and  ever  watching 
-over  their  interests  with  sedulous  care. 

We  have  about  this  time  a  number  of  incidental  references 
•which  throw  light  on  the  general  condition  of  the  colony.  Its 
General  prosperity  was  shown  by  the  vote  of  fifteen  hundred 
.colony.  e  pounds  towards  building  a  state  house,  and  of  a  thou- 
sand pounds  towards  a  residence  for  the  Governor.3     The  fact, 

1  Trott's  Ecclesiastical  Laws,  p.  6  2  Ib.t  p.  n. 

8  Trott's  Laws  of  South  Carolina,  pp.  209-11.     Rivers,  p.  252. 


WAR  WITH  THE   YAMASSEES.  ,73 

too,  that  the  opposition  to  the  Church  party  never  took  the  form 
of  refusing  or  curtailing  endowments  is  another  proof  of  the  ma- 
terial well-being  of  the  colony.  The  circumstance  to  which  this 
was  mainly  due  was  the  establishment  of  a  new  staple  of  industry. 
The  exact  time  at  which  rice  was  first  introduced  into  South  Caro- 
lina is  uncertain.  But  we  know  that  by  169 1  it  was  so  important  a 
product  that  the  Governor  gave  a  reward  to  the  inventor  of  a 
new  machine  for  the  preparation  of  it.1  The  effect  was  felt  in 
two  ways.  It  insured  the  commercial  prosperity  of  the  colony 
by  providing  a  staple  in  which  South  Carolina  had  no  rivalry  to 
fear  from  any  of  the  neighboring  colonies.  Moreover,  it  con- 
firmed negro  slavery  by  introducing  a  form  of  tillage  for  which 
the  African  was  far  better  adapted  than  the  European,  and  also 
by  providing  that  cheap  and  easily-raised  sustenance  which  is  a 
necessary  condition  of  slave  labor. 

Measured  by  population,  South  Carolina  had  made  slow  prog- 
ress compared  with  either  Virginia  or  Maryland.  By  1708  the 
total  number  of  settlers  did  not  amount  to  ten  thousand,  of  whom 
not  more  than  thirteen  hundred  and  sixty  were  freemen.2  The 
whole  yearly  trade  of  the  settlement  did  not  employ  more  than 
twenty-two  vessels.3  Of  the  social  life  of  the  colonists  we  know 
but  little.  It  is  clear  that  estates  were  smaller  than  in  Virginia, 
and  that  slave  gangs  seldom  exceeded  thirty  in  number,4  and 
consequently  there  was  less  of  that  isolated  and  patriarchal  life 
which  distinguished  the  great  Virginian  planters. 

Craven's  administration  was  unhappily  distinguished  by  the 
first  serious  conflict  between  the  settlers  and  the  Indians.  We 
The  have  already  seen  how  South  Carolina  stretched  out  a 

Yamassee  heipjng  ^and  to  the  sister  colony  in  its  war  with  the 
Tuscaroras.  Scarcely  was  that  ended  when  an  Indian  invasion 
fell  on  South  Carolina  itself.  The  principal  tribe  on  the  southern 
frontier  was  the  Yamassees.  In  the  early  days  of  the  English 
colony  that  nation  had  been  in  alliance  with  the  Spaniards. 
Their  friendship  now  seemed  to  be  at  an  end,  and  the  English 

1  Rivers,  p.  172. 

2  Report  of  the  Governor  and  Council,  quoted  in  Rivers,  p.  232. 

•  Carroll,  vol.  ii.  p.  254.  4  **-,  P-  2°2- 

■  I  have  taken  this  account  of  the  Yamassee  War  mainly  from  Mr.  Rivers.  His  account  is 
largely  based  on  MS.  records.  There  is  a  short  contemporary  account  of  the  outbreak  of  the 
war  in  Carroll,  vol.  ii.  p.  570,  taken  from  the  Boston  News-letter.  It  is  also  touched  upon  in 
a  very  important  pamphlet,  The  Proceedings  oftlie  People  of  South  Carolina,  London,  1726, 
republished  in  Carroll,  vol.  ii.  p.  14T,  and  in  Force,  vol.  ii.  Hewit,  whose  History  of  South 
Carolina  was  published  in  1779,  may  probably  be  trusted  on  matters  of  notoriety. 


374  THE  TW0  CAROLINA S. 

rested  secure  in  the  belief  that  the  hatred  of  the  savages  was 
directed  against  the  Spaniards.  The  feud,  however,  was  made 
up ;  the  Yamassees,  whether  of  their  own  free  will  or  at  the  insti- 
gation of  their  civilized  allies,  resolved  to  attack  the  English  set- 
tlement, and  as  a  preliminary  step,  sent  their  wives  and  children 
for  safe  keeping  to  St.  Augustine. 

The  strength  of  an  Indian  force  lay  in  the  first  onslaught  j 
when  once  that  failed,  the  military  resources  of  the  savage  had 
neither  durability  nor  cohesion  enough  to  stand  the  strain  of  a 
regular  campaign.  Fortunately,  too,  the  relations  between  the 
Indians  and  the  settlers  seldom  suffered  a  general  attack  to  be 
made  with  strict  secresy.  In  almost  every  instance  some  of  the 
outlying  settlers  were  on  such  terms  with  their  savage  neighbors 
as  to  secure  a  friendly  warning.  In  this  case  the  intended  attack 
was  disclosed  to  John  Fraser,  a  Scotchman,  who  had  traded 
among  the  Yamassees.  A  friendly  chief  not  only  revealed  the 
plot,  but  even  offered  to  expedite  Fraser's  escape  by  the  loan  of 
his  own  canoe.  Fraser  himself  fled  to  Charlestown,  but  basely 
or  stupidly  neglected  to  warn  his  fellow- settlers.  On  the  15th 
of  April,  1 7 1 6,  the  blow  fell.  The  Indians  by  common  agree- 
ment invaded  the  colony  in  three  separate  places,  and  about  two 
hundred  English  perished. 

Fortunately  the  settlers  were  not  spread  abroad  over  the  coun- 
try to  the  same  extent  as  in  Virginia,  and  thus  there  was  greater 
possibility  of  united  action.  Craven  at  once  led  a  force  of  two 
hundred  and  forty  men  against  the  principal  body  of  the  inva- 
ders, and  sent  out  other  expeditions  to  meet  the  enemy  at  various 
points.  The  first  attack  was  repulsed.  Yet  the  danger  was  not 
at  an  end.  Tribe  after  tribe  rose  and  the  forest  poured  forth 
fresh  forces,  till  nearly  ten  thousand  armed  warriors  threatened 
the  borders  of  the  English  settlement.  The  colonists  soon 
learned  how  much  they  owed  to  those  who  had  forced  a  capital 
city  into  existence  against  the  natural  tendencies  of  the  country. 
Craven  swept  together  all  the  defenseless  inhabitants  and  all  the 
stores  and  goods  from  the  outlying  settlements  into  Charlestown, 
and  sent  to  the  northern  colonies  for  help.  Virginia  contributed 
a  hundred  auxiliaries,  and  this  force  was  strengthened  by  a  hun- 
dred Indian  allies  and  four  hundred  negroes.  No  attempt  was 
made  to  crush  the  enemy  at  a  single  blow,  but  the  Governor  fol- 
lowed out  that  policy  which  the  more  experienced  Virginians  had 
recommended  to  their  own  Government  some  thirty  years  earlier, 


FINANCIAL  DIFFICULTIES.  375 

and  kept  the  Indians  in  check  by  a  line  of  outposts  occupied 
with  parties  of  rangers.  Gradually  the  danger  passed  away. 
Early  in  1716  Craven  was  able  to  leave  his  colony  in  peace,  with 
nothing  to  fear  from  the  savages  beyond  the  ever-present  danger 
of  desultory  raids  encouraged  by  the  Spaniards. 

The  evils  of  the  Indian  war  did  not  end  when  the  actual 
danger  was  averted.  It  left  the  colony  hampered  with  a  heavy 
Poverty  of  debt.  This  was  soon  afterwards  increased  by  an  ex- 
the  colony,  pedition  against  pirates.  A  dangerous  gang  of  these 
was  extirpated,  mainly  by  the  courage  of  the  new  Governor, 
Johnson,  and  of  Rhett,  who  had  distinguished  himself  in  the  de- 
fense of  Charlestown,1  but  the  colony  was  entangled  in  additional 
expense  at  a  time  when  its  resources  could  ill  bear  the  strain. 

To  meet  these  charges  eighty  thousand  pounds  in  paper  money 
was  put  in  circulation.  The  inevitable  result  of  a  sudden  and 
excessive  issue  followed.  Prices  at  one  rose  without  any  change 
in  the  relative  value  of  commodities ;  debtors  gained,  while  cred- 
itors and  the  receivers  of  fixed  income  suffered.  As  is  always  the 
case,  the  general  loss  caused  by  this  dislocation  of  commerce 
was  far  greater  than  the  gain  to  individuals.  Those  merchants  in 
England  to  whom  the  planters  owed  money,  ordered  their  agents 
to  remit  any  goods  that  they  could  get  in  lieu  of  their  claim. 
Thus  the  rise  of  prices  and  the  evils  which  resulted  from  it  were 
yet  further  enhanced.  The  Proprietors  attempted  to  escape  their 
share  in  the  general  evil,  by  raising  their  rents  fourfold  to  meet 
the  depreciated  value  of  money.  At  the  same  time  the  colonial 
exchequer  was  deprived  of  two  resources  which  might  have  helped 
it  in  its  present  poverty.  The  Assembly  laid  an  import  duty  on 
negroes  and  on  English  goods.  Both  of  these  duties  were 
vetoed  by  the  Proprietors  in  obedience  to  an  Order  in  Council. 
It  would  have  been  wholly  inconsistent  with  the  policy  of  the 
crown  to  allow  any  colonial  legislature  to  take  independent  action 
on  a  question  which  directly  affected  the  whole  economical  sys- 
tem of  the  empire. 

The  colony  was  thus  placed  in  this  unhappy  position.  Its  ma- 
terial interests  were  sacrificed  to  the  good  of  the  imperial  excheq- 
uer, while,  on  the  other  hand,  it  enjoyed  none  of  the  advantages 
which  a  colony  might  expect  from  its  connection  with  the  crown. 
The  task  of  providing  for  its  defense  was  left  to  the  Proprietors, 

1  Rivers,  p.  285.  Proceedings,  p.  148.  My  account  of  what  follows  is  wholly  taken  from 
this  pamphlet. 


376  THE  TWO  CAROLINA S. 

who  lacked  certainly  spirit  and  probably  means  for  the  purpose, 
and  who  really  had  less  interest  than  the  crown  in  the  econom- 
ical prosperity  of  the  colony. 

Other  occurrences  at  this  time  served  to  imbitter  the  relations 
between  the  colonists  and  the  Proprietors.  Hitherto  the  mode 
of  election  had  been  that  all  the  freemen  of  the  colony  met  at 
Political  Charlestown  and  elected  twenty  representatives.X  The 
between  submission  of  the  outlying  settlements  to  this  arrange- 
andth"1'5"5  ment  shows  how  completely  Charlestown  dominated 
Proprietors.  t|ie  colony,  while  the  system  must  in  turn  have  con- 
firmed the  ascendency  of  the  capital.  At  length,  in  1717,  the 
county  electors  demanded  a  change,  not  so  much  as  it  would 
seem  from  any  jealousy  of  Charlestown,  as  from  a  belief  that 
the  existing  method  of  election  threw  an  undue  share  of  influence 
into  the  hands  of  the  official  party.  That  party  had  been  re- 
cently strengthened  by  the  appointment  to  the  governorship  of 
Sir  Nathaniel  Johnson's  son,  who  inherited  the  aristocratic  prin- 
ciples together  with  the  soldier-like  sincerity  and  loyalty  of  his 
father.  A  law  was  soon  passed  abolishing  the  old  method  of 
election  and  substituting  local  representation.  Without  waiting 
for  the  consent  of  the  Proprietors,  this  law  was  put  in  force  and 
an  Assembly  elected  on  the  new  principle.  The  Proprietors,  as 
soon  as  the  law  reached  them,  vetoed  it,  and  ordered  the  Gov- 
ernor to  dissolve  the  new  Assembly.  The  Assembly  then  took 
up  a  new  line  and  disputed  the  constitutional  right  of  the  Pro- 
prietors to  exercise  a  veto,  on  the  ground  that  they  had  trans- 
ferred that  right  to  their  deputies,  who,  as  members  of  the  Council, 
had  consented  to  the  measure,  and  that  the  right  could  not  now 
be  resumed. 

Another  dispute  arose  in  which  the  right  seems  to  have  been  on 
the  side  of  the  Proprietors.  The  Assembly,  anxious  to  encourage 
free  emigrants,  had  induced  a  number  of  poor  Irish  to  come 
over  by  promising  them  two  hundred  acres  of  land  apiece.  The 
conditions  were  accepted  and  a  number  of  emigrants  landed. 
The  Proprietors  refused  to  be  bound  by  the  promise  of  the 
Assembly,  and  the  colony  found  itself  suddenly  invaded  by  a 
horde  of  paupers  for  whom  there  was  no  provision.  It  is  dim- 
cult  to  see  on  what  ground  the  Assembly  claimed  a  right  to  grant 
away  land,  or  how  the  Proprietors  could  have  admitted  such  a 
claim  without  forfeiting  the  last  remnant  of  their  territorial  title. 

The  same  spirit  of  opposition  to  the  official  party  showed  it- 


A  TTA  CK  ON  TROTT.  3 7  7 

self  in  an  attack  upon  Trott.  A  formal  complaint  against  him 
Attack  was  drawn  up  by  a  number  of  lawyers  practicing  in 
upon  Trott.  t^e  colony,  and  laid  before  the  Council.  This  docu- 
ment contained  thirty-one  articles  and  charged  the  Chief  Justice 
with  various  corrupt  practices.  He  was  accused  of  multiplying 
fees,  of  transferring  cases  from  one  court  to  another,  and  of  act- 
ing as  counsel  for  the  purpose  of  drafting  deeds,  which  afterwards 
came  before  him  as  judge.  In  addition  to  these  formal  charges, 
the  petitioners  drew  attention  to  the  defects  of  the  judicial  system 
under  which  Trott  had  acquired  to  himself  that  appellate  juris- 
diction which,  according  to  its  original  purpose,  should  have  been 
a  check  upon  him. 

The  Assembly  declined  to  entertain  this  petition  as  lying  out- 
side their  functions.  Trott,  they  said,  held  his  position  from  the 
Proprietors  during  good  behavior,  and  the  Proprietors  therefore 
were  the  proper  persons  to  whom  complaints  should  be  directed. 

The  Assembly  now  decided  that  all  the  questions  at  issue 
should  be  definitely  laid  before  the  Proprietors,  and  that  for  that 
An  agent  purpose  an  authorized  agent  should  be  sent  to  England. 
England.  There  had  lately  been  a  change  in  the  constitution  of 
the  Proprietary  body.  The  office  of  Palatine  had  devolved  by 
inheritance  on  the  nephew  of  Lord  Granville,  then  at  the  outset 
of  a  brilliant  yet  unfruitful  career,  the  all-accomplished,  wayward 
Carteret.  We  may  well  believe  that  if  the  colony  had  been  what 
it  was  thirty  years  earlier,  the  political  career  which  it  seemed  to 
hold  out  might  have  fascinated  him,  as  it  had  fascinated  the  kin- 
dred temper  of  Shaftesbury.  But  all  romance  and  all  the  attrac- 
tions of  pomp  and  power  had  by  this  time  passed  away  from  the 
position  of  the  Proprietors.  Carteret,  too,  had  just  accepted  the 
post  of  ambassador  at  the  Swedish  Court,  and  his  connection  with 
the  colony  remained  merely  titular. 

The  remonstrances  of  the  colonists  produced  no  effect  on  the 
Proprietors.  The  only  course  left  to  the  aggrieved  settlers  was 
a  Popular  to  transfer  their  allegiance  to  the  crown,  which  was  able 
formedatl°n  and  willing  to  give  them  protection.  The  leaders  of 
the  popular  party  were  astute  enough  to  see  that  a  semblance  of 
loyalty  would  be  given  to  their  conduct  if  they  could  induce  the 
Governor  to  take  their  part.  New  machinery  was  soon  brought 
to  bear  on  the  question.  A  Popular  Association  was  formed, 
chiefly  by  the  agency  of  Alexander  Skene,  a  planter  from  Barba- 
does.     So  stealthily  was  this  organized  that  the  Governor  knew 


378  THE  TWO  CAROLINAS. 

nothing  of  its  existence,  till  he  received  an  address  signed  by 
three  of  its  leaders,  desiring  him  to  disclaim  formally  the  authority 
of  the  Proprietors  and  hold  office  under  the  crown.  Johnson 
met  this  with  a  peremptory  refusal,  and,  in  consideration  of  the 
disaffected  state  of  the  colony  and  the  necessity  for  some  meas- 
ures of  defense  against  the  Indians  and  the  Spaniards,  summoned 
an  Assembly. 

In  1 7 19  the  Assembly  met.  One  of  the  complaints  against  the 
Proprietors  was  that  they  had  exceeded  their  power  in  their  manner 
The  of  nominating  a  Council.      That  body,  it  was  said, 

Assembly  ought  to  consist  of  the  deputies  of  the  Proprietors,  one 
itself  a  for  each.  The  Proprietors,  however,  had  gone  beyond 
and  re-  this  and  had  nominated  a  greater  number.  This,  as 
the  Propn-  tne  leaders  of  the  Association  contended,  vitiated  the 
position  of  the  Council  and  deprived  it  of  any  legal  au- 
thority. Upon  this  view  the  very  writs  under  which  the  Assembly 
itself  was  elected  were  null  and  void.  It  might  reasonably  have 
been  held  that  while  the  Proprietors  had  exceeded  their  lawful 
powers  in  their  manner  of  nominating  the  Council,  they  had  not 
thereby  annulled  the  acts  of  that  body  or  destroyed  its  constitu- 
tional powers.  Probably,  however,  the  Assembly  preferred  to  as- 
sume the  attitude  which  their  contention  necessarily  forced  upon 
them,  that,  namely,  of  a  convention  elected  by  the  people  with 
no  fixed  constitutional  authority.  Taking  that  ground,  they  made 
another  attempt  to  induce  the  Governor  to  renounce  the  Propri- 
etors. As  before  he  refused.  The  speech  in  which  he  did  so, 
though  long,  did  nothing  towards  grappling  with  the  difficulties 
of  the  case.  He  made  no  attempt  to  defend  the  Proprietors  from 
the  various  charges  brought  against  them,  but  contented  himself 
with  reiterating  the  simple  constitutional  doctrine  that  the  Pro- 
prietors were  the  legally  constituted  sovereigns,  and  that  their 
authority  could  only  be  overthrown  by  due  course  of  law.  In 
truth,  the  colony  had  reached  one  of  those  emergencies  when  all 
appeals  to  constitutional  form  are  valueless,  since  one  party  con- 
tends that  those  forms  no  longer  adequately  recognize  its  rights, 
and  when  the  body  politic  must  be  wholly  or  in  part  reconstituted 
out  of  its  original  elements.  Yet  impracticable  as  Johnson  was, 
we  cannot  but  respect  his  fidelity  to  a  hopeless  cause,  sustained 
by  no  hope  of  personal  advantage. 

Johnson's  loyalty  was  not  imitated  by  his  colleagues.  Trott 
and  Rhett  held  aloof,  and  it  was  clear  from  what  followed  that 


EXTINCTION  OF  THE  PROPRIETARY  GOVERNMENT    37 g 

the  Proprietors  had  no  supporters  of  any  weight  except  the  Gov- 
ernor. Whatever  remnants  of  loyalty  to  them  might  yet  have 
Overthrow  existed  were  dispelled  by  a  rumor,  possibly  circulated 
Proprietary  by  their  enemies,  that  they  were  treating  for  the  sale 
Sent".11"        of  their  proprietary  rights  to  three  Quakers. 

On  the  21st  of  December,  two  days  after  the  Governor's  final 
refusal,  the  last  scene  was  enacted.  The  Governor  had  summon- 
ed the  militia  to  assemble  for  a  review,  but,  distrusting  the  popu- 
lar temper,  had  countermanded  them.  On  the  appointed  day, 
however,  they  appeared  under  arms  in  the  market-place  of  Charles- 
town.  Johnson  asked  their  commander,  Colonel  Paris,  by  what 
authority  he  acted  ?  He  replied,  by  that  of  the  Convention. 
The  Governor  expostulated,  and  then  rushed  about  among  the 
crowd,  remonstrating  with  each  man  singly,  and  almost  using 
personal  violence.  Had  not  there  been  perfect  unanimity  and 
singular  sobriety  and  self-restraint  on  the  popular  side,  bloodshed 
must  have  followed.  As  it  was,  Moore  was  peacefully  proclaimed 
Governor  under  the  crown,  and  the  authority  of  the  Proprietors 
was,  as  far  as  lay  in  the  power  of  the  people,  formally  annulled. 
A  Council  of  Twelve  was  chosen  by  the  Convention,  and  various 
public  officers  were  appointed. 

There  were  now  two  governments  left  facing  one  another,  one 
existing  de  jure,  the  other  de  facto.  Fortunately,  however,  for 
Peaceful  tne  Peace  °f tne  colony,  none  of  the  Proprietary  officials 
settlement.  save  Johnson  showed  any  wish  to  resist  the  popular 
will,  nor  did  the  Proprietors  themselves  take  any  step  towards  re- 
establishing their  authority.  It  could  not  be  expected  that  the 
crown  should  refuse  the  allegiance  which  the  colonists  forced 
upon  it,  or  should  do  more  for  the  Proprietors  than  the  Proprie- 
tors were  doing  for  themselves.  The  English  government  ac- 
cepted the  situation,  and  the  ubiquitous  and  ever-active  Nicholson 
was  dispatched  to  South  Carolina  to  administer  the  government 
in  the  name  of  the  king,  and  to  pacify  the  colony  in  its  distracted 
condition.  Thus  South  like  North  Carolina  passed  peacefully 
and  of  its  own  free  choice  under  the  sovereignty  of  the  crown. 
Ten  years  later  an  Act  of  Parliament  was  passed,  apparently  with 
the  good-will  of  the  Proprietors,  annulling  their  political  rights, 
while,  at  the  same  time,  their  territorial  claims  over  both  the 
Northern  and  Southern  colonies  were  transferred  to  the  crown  for 
the  sum  of  seventeen  thousand  five  hundred  pounds.1 


George  II.  34. 


380  THE  TWO  CAROLINA  S. 

The  overthrow  of  the  Proprietary  system  in  South  Carolina  is  a 
distinct  step  in  the  process  whereby  the  various  American  colonies 
General  were  tranled  in  habits  of  self-government  and  fitted  for 
ofithe5*er  ^e  §reat  struggle  of  fifty  years  later.  The  Revolution  of 
Revolution,  j  y  ig  was  important  in  itself,  but  it  was  far  more  important 
for  the  temper  which  it  developed  and  confirmed.  How  to  effect 
constitutional  changes  with  the  least  possible  disturbance,  how  to 
throw  aside  so  much  of  institutions  as  is  corrupt  and  to  retain  all 
that  is  sound,  this  has  ever  been  the  great  political  lesson  which 
English  history  has  taught  to  the  world.  Her  own  history  fur- 
nishes a  continuous  illustration  of  the  process,  and  it  is  manifested 
with  scarcely  less  force  in  the  life  of  those  communities  to  which 
she  has  given  birth.  Never  was  this  tendency  more  conspicu- 
ously shown  than  in  the  separation  of  the  American  colonies. 
The  overthrow  of  the  Proprietary  government  in  South  Carolina 
was  a  small  matter  compared  with  the  later  revolution,  yet  its 
principle  was  the  same.  In  each  case  the  requirements  of  the 
community  had  gradually  outgrown  its  institutions.  In  each  case 
there  was  the  same  anxiety  to  avoid  an  unnecessary  breach,  the 
same  spirit  of  compromise,  and  when  the  rupture  came  the  same 
desire  to  preserve  as  much  as  possible  of  the  old  forms.  In  each 
case,  too,  the  defects  of  the  past  system  contributed  in  a  measure 
to  the  stability  of  that  which  succeeded  it.  Just  as  the  neglect 
and  indifference  of  the  crown  had  trained  the  colonists  in  habits 
of  self-government,  so  the  Proprietary  system  had  virtually  al- 
lowed the  community  to  fashion  a  constitution  according  to  its 
own  will,  and  had  given  to  the  body  politic  that  strength  and 
cohesion  which  bore  the  strain  of  separation,  and  at  a  later  day 
enabled  it  to  play  its  part  in  the  great  struggle  for  national  inde- 
pendence. 


~£tf  LI 


UNIVERSITY  '■ 


*  CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE  SOCIAL  AND  ECONOMICAL  LIFE  OF  THE  SOUTHERN  COLONIES.' 

In  dealing  with  the  social  and  economical  condition  of  those 
colonies  whose 'nistory  we  have  traced,  it  will  be  best  to  treat 
Uniform      them  collectively,  as  in  some  measure  forming  mem- 

charadler      ,  _  _       /         .  _  .     ,  _  & 

of  the  bers  of  one  body  with  common  industry  and  manner 

colonies"  of  life.  This  similarity  was  due  to  various  causes.  It 
was  in  a  large  measure  dependent  on  peculiarities  of  soil,  cli- 
mate, and  geographical  formation.  The  combination  of  fertility 
and  heat  freed  the  inhabitants  from  the  necessity  of  severe  labor, 
whether  for  food,  clothing,  or  building.  The  widely  distributed  J- 
productiveness  of  the  soil  and  the  abundance  of  navigable  rivers 
prevented  population  from  being  gathered  together  in  seats  of  in- 
dustry and  commerce. 

These  natural  tendencies  towards  uniformity  were  confirmed 
by  other  conditions.  Each  of  the  colonies  was  formed  out  of  u» 
like  elements  and  founded  on  like  principles.  Each  was  estab- 
lished primarily  for  purposes  of  profit  by  trade  and  agriculture. 
None  of  them  was  designed  to  embody  any  special  theories, 
either  political  or  religious.  All,  accordingly,  were  free  to  take 
that  bent  towards  which  their  natural  conditions  of  soil  and 
climate  and  the  previous  training  of  the  colonists  inclined  them. 
Carolina  was  no  exception.  It  is  true  that  the  founders  had 
mapped  out  a  definite  political  scheme  for  the  colony.  But  as 
far  as  the  actual  life  of  Carolina  went,  the  scheme  of  Locke  was 
as  though  it  had  never  existed.  Nor  had  the  Proprietors  of 
Carolina  any  idea  of  putting  into  practice  certain  religious  or  po- 
litical theories,  such  as  those  which  were  embodied  in  Massachu- 
setts or  Pennsylvania.  The  colony,  as  a  source  of  profit,  came  f 
first.  The  Proprietors  deemed  it  necessary  that  there  should  be 
a  constitution,  and  Locke's  work  was  the  result. 

38i 


3S2    GENERAL   VIEW  OF  THE  SOUTHERN  COLONIES. 

The  southern  colonies  were  also  alike  in  the  material  out  of 
which  they  vveri  formed.  Each  drew  its  governing  class  from 
the  landed  gentry,  with  but  a  slight  infusion  of  yeomanry.  Be- 
low the  great  landholders  came  a  population  largely  tainted  with 
pauperism  and  crime.  Thus  there  was  a  wide  gap  between  the 
upper  and  lower  orders,  a  gap  which  was  enlarged  by  the  natural 
condition  of  the  country  and  the  social  and  industrial  system  to 
which  these  conditions  gave  birth. 

This,  indeed,  does  not  apply  with  equal  force  to  each  of  the 
southern  colonies.  In  Maryland  many  of  the  first  settlers  were 
free  laborers.  In  Virginia  some  were.  Carolina,  on  the  other 
hand,  was  settled  at  a  tjme  when  slave  labor  had  been  definitely 
organized  into  a  >system  in  which  the  free  peasant  or  yeoman 
could  find  no  place.  We  have  seen,  too,  how  tlie  first  settlers  in 
Carolina  were  influenced  by  those  ideas  and  practices  which 
many  of  their  number  had  learned  in  Barbadoes.  (.Thus  socially 
as  in  a  geographical  position,  Maryland  stood  at  orie  end  of  the 
chain  and  Carolina  at  the  other,  while  the  history  as  well  as  the 
natural  conditions  of  Virginia  gave  her  an  intermediate  char- 
acter. 

These  points  of  difference,  however,  only  modified,  and  did  not 
override  the  tendency  to  uniformity.  The  one  great  predominant 
Early  influence  that  ran  through  all  the  southern  colonies  and 

'slavery.  moulded  their  usages  and  principles  was  slavery.  As 
we  have  seen,  the  form  of  servile  labor  which  was  first  introduced 
into  our  American  colonies  was  not  that  which  ultimately  pre- 
vailed. In  the  early  days  of  Virginia  and  Maryland  the  slave 
was  usually  not  a  negro,  but  an  Englishman  condemned  either 
penally  or  by  contract  to  a  limited  period  of  bondage.  As  far  as 
we  can  judge  from  the  scanty  and  scattered  records  at  our  com- 
mand, the  condition  and  character  of  the  indented  servant  under- 
went a  marked  change  during  the  seventeenth  century,  and  a 
change  for  the  worse.  At  the  outset  this  class  was  supplied  from 
two  sources.  A  few  were  felons,  usually  those  with  whom  cap- 
ital punishment  had  been  commuted  to  colonial  servitude.1  The 
cases,  however,  do  not  seem  to  have  been  numerous,  and  proba- 
bly had  but  little  effect  on  the  general  character  of  the  popula- 

1  The  earliest  instance  of  such  transportation  which  I  can  find  is  in  June,  1618,  when  one 
Ambrose  Smithe,  a  felon,  is  reprieved  by  the  magistrates  of  Middlesex  to  be  employed  in  any 
service  in  Virginia  or  the  East  Indies.  Domestic  Papers.  Several  instances  of  transportation 
are  to  be  found  in  Mr.  Sainsbury's  Calendar  of  Papers  from  1661-70.  He  has  some  general 
remarks  on  the  subject  in  his  Preface,  p.  xxix. 


WHITE  SERVANTS. 


383 


tion.  The  bulk  of  the  indented  servants  in  Virginia  were  labor- 
ers who  bound  themselves  for  a  fixed  term  of  service  with  a  cer- 
tainty of  becoming  small  freeholders  at  the  end  of  that  period. 
Gradually  the  system  was  changed.  The  great  tobacco  plantations 
of  Virginia  needed  a  larger  servile  population  than  could  be  provid- 
ed by  the  chance  supply  of  pardoned  criminals.  Nor  were  the 
ultimate  prospects  of  an  indented  servant  such  as  to  attract  free 
laborers  in  any  number.  The  market  was  indeed  partly  furnished 
by  political  prisoners.  There  were  few  ages  of  English  history 
in  which  this  resource  would  have  insured  so  constant  a  supply  as 
in  the  latter  half  of  the  seventeenth  century.  Penruddock's  at- 
tempt against  the  Commonwealth  in  1655/  the  Scotch  rebellion 
in  1666,2  the  rising  of  the  West  under  Monmouth,3  the  Jacobite 
insurrection  of  17 15,4  each  furnished  its  share  of  prisoners  to  the 
colonies.  But  the  demand  was  far  in  excess  of  such  precarious 
aids,  and,  as  might  have  been  expected,  it  soon  produced  a  reg- 
ular and  organized  supply.  It  became  a  trade  to  furnish  the 
plantations  with  servile  labor  drawn  from  the  offscourings  of  the 
mother  country. 

When  the  new  Colonial  Board  came  into  being  in  1661,  not 
the  least  important  of  its  duties  was  the  control  of  the  trade  in 
indented  servants.  In  that  year  a  committee  was  appointed  to 
consider  the  best  means  of  furnishing  labor  to  the  plantations  by 
authorizing  contractors  to  transport  criminals,  beggars,  and  va- 
grants.5 More  important  than  the  encouragement  of  this  trade 
was  the  control  and  direction  of  it.  The  evils  of  the  system  were 
twofold.  On  the  one  hand,  the  young,  the  inexperienced,  and 
the  friendless  were  at  the  mercy  of  kidnappers,  spirits,  as  they 
were  called,  who  forced  or  beguiled  them  on  shipboard  and  trans- 
ported them  to  the  colonial  market.  Children  and  apprentices 
were  stolen.6  All  those,  and  in  a  lawless  age  such  as  that 
was,  there  were  many,  of  whom  profligacy,  cupidity,  or  malevo- 
lence would  fain  rid  themselves,  were  in  danger  of  being  con- 

1  Colonial  Papers,  1656,  January  8.  Edward  Penruddock  and  another  petition  to  be  sent 
to  Virginia  rather  than  Barbadoes. 

2  Colonial  Papers,  1666,  December  13. 

3  Virginian  Papers,  1685,  October. 

4  A  letter  from  Carteret  (Carolina  Papers,  June,  1716)  states  that  some  Jacobites  taken 
prisoners  at  Preston  had  successfully  petitioned  to  be  transported  to  Carolina,  to  serve  there 
for  seven  years. 

8  Colonial  Papers,  1661,  June  3. 

6  The  earliest  use  that  I  find  of  this  name  "spirits"  is  in  1657  (Colonial  Papers,  August  6) 
Four  years  earlier  we  find  one  Robert  Broome  obtaining  a  warrant  for  the  recovery  of  his  son, 
kidnapped  by  the  captain  of  a  vessel  sailing  to  Virginia. 


f 


384    GENERAL   VIEW  OF  THE  SOUTHERN  COLONIES. 

signed  to  a  life  which  left  small  chances  of  discovery  or  escape. 
The  first  and  greatest  in  Johnson's  series  of  biographies  has  famil- 
iarized the  world  with  such  an  instance.  Savage's  account  of  his 
parentage  and  early  days  may  have  been  a  romance.  But  it  was 
a  romance  which  aimed  at  probability,  and  the  fate  of  James  An- 
nesley  shows  that  banishment  to  the  plantations  was  the  probable 
lot  of  a  child  whose  existence  threatened  disgrace  or  trouble  to  a 
noble  family.1 

Nor  was  this  the  only  danger  of  the  system.  The  Bristol  slave 
ships  served  not  only  as  a  prison  for  the  innocent,  but  as  a  refuge 
for  the  guilty.  Runaway  apprentices,  faithless  husbands  and 
wives,  fugitive  thieves  and  murderers,  were  thus  enabled  to  es- 
cape beyond  the  reach  of  civil  or  criminal  justice.2  The  system, 
however,  was  as  yet  too  necessary  to  be  given  up.  The  states- 
men of  Charles  I.'s  reign  betook  themselves  with  energy  to  the 
problems  of  colonial  government.  The  question  of  slavery  was 
perhaps  the  most  difficult  that  came  before  them,  and  they  met  it 
with  judgment  and,  as  it  would  seem,  with  fair  success. 

In  1664  a  commission  was  appointed,  with  the  Duke  of  York 
at  its  head,  to  examine  and  report  upon  the  exportation  of  serv- 
ants.3 At  the  same  time  an  office  was  established  where  all  per- 
sons going  out  of  their  own  free  will  might  register  their  indent- 
ures.4 Six  years  later  a  bill  was  laid  before  Parliament  to  make 
the  kidnapping  of  children  for  the  plantations  a  capital  crime.5 
The  evil  still  went  on,  as  we  learn  from  the  records  of  the  next 
reign.  In  1682  we  find  a  number  of  merchants  petitioning 
against  vexatious  prosecutions  by  the  crown  on  the  charge  of 
having  exported  persons  to  the  plantations,  although  they  had 
the  free  consent  of  such  persons.6  We  read,  "too,  how  the  magis- 
trates of  Bristol  drove  a  thriving  trade  by  condemning  criminals 
and  transferring  them  as  articles  of  merchandise  from  one  to  an- 
other^and  how  the  exposure  and  denunciation  of  these  malprac- 

1  The  legal  proceedings  in  the  case  of  James  Annesley  are  fully  reported  in  the  Gentle- 
man's Magazine  for  1744.  His  adventures  in  America  are  told  in  a  pamphlet  entitled  The 
Memoirs  of  an  Unfortunate  Nobleman,  returned  from,  a  Thirteen  Years'  Slavery  in 
America,  published  in  Dublin,  1743. 

2  All  these  evils  are  set  forth  in  a  petition  from  the  Mayor  of  Bristol.  Colonial  Papers, 
1662,  July  16. 

3  Colonial  Papers,  1664,  September  7.  4  lb. 

6  The  measure  passed  the  Lower  House,  was  returned  by  the  Lords  in  an  amended  form/ 
and  came  to  nothing.     See  Commons  Journals. 

6  The  petition  is  referred  to  the  Boards  of  Trade  and  Plantations  by  an  Order  of  Council, 
November  3,  1682. 


INTRODUCTION  OF  NEGROES. 


385 


ir 


tices  by  Jeffreys  formed  the  one  redeeming  feature  of  the  Bloody 
Assizes.1 

The  publicity  thus  given  to  the  matter  may  have  brought  about 
the  Order  of  Council  in  March,  1686,  directed  alike  against  kid- 
nappers and  fraudulent  servants.2  This  provided,  1.  That  all 
contracts  between  emigrant  servants  and  their  masters  should  be 
formally  executed  before  two  magistrates,  and  that  a  register  of 
such  bargains  should  be  kept.  2.  That  no  adult  should  be  trans- 
ported but  by  his  own  free  consent,  and  no  child  without  the  con- 
sent of  either  the  parent  or  master.  3.  In  the  case  of  children 
under  fourteen,  the  consent  of  the  parent  as  well  as  the  master 
was  necessary,  unless  the  former  was  not  forthcoming.  That  a 
system  which  imposed  no  check  upon  the  kidnapping  of  friend- 
less orphans,  or  the  sale  of  children  by  their  own  parents,  should 
have  been  accepted  as  satisfactory,  is  a  startling  illustration  of 
the  temper  of  that  age,  and  of  the  vast  gulf  which  in  some  mat- 
ters severs  us  from  our  forefathers.  After  this  no  trace  is  to  be 
found  of  any  legislative  attempt  to  cope  with  these  abuses.  That, 
however,  may  be  attributed  not  to  the  improvement  of  the  sys- 
tem, but  to  the  fact  that  it  was  gradually  giving  way  before  a 
rival  form  of  industry. 

The  economical  success  which  had  attended  the  introduction 
of  negroes  into  the  West  Indies  made  it  almost  certain  that  the 
Establish-  American  colonies  would  betake  themselves  to  the 
ment  of  same  resource.  The  first  introduction  of  negroes  is 
slavery.  commonly  placed  in  the  year  1620,  when  a  Dutch 
ship  landed  twenty  of  them  for  sale  at  Jamestown.3  For  some 
years  their  numbers  increased  but  slowly.  In  1649  Virginia  con- 
tained only  three  hundred.4  By  1661  they  had  increased  to  two 
thousand,  while  the  indented  servants  were  four  times  that  num- 
ber.5 Twenty-two'  years  later,  if  we  may  trust  Culpepper's  state- 
ment, the  number  of  white  servants  was  nearly  doubled,  while 
that  of  the  negroes  had  only  increased  by  one-half.6  Of  their 
numbers  and  proportions  in  Maryland  and  North  Carolina  we 
have  no  definite  evidence.  In  South  Carolina  negro  slavery  ^ 
seems  to  have  been,  almost  from  the  outset,  the  prevalent  form 

1  North's  Life  of  Lord- Guildford,  ed.  1742,  pp.  121,  216. 

2  A  printed  copy  of  this  order  is  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  bound  up  with  various  American 
pamphlets. 

3  Beverley,  p.  35. 

4  A  Perfect  Description  of  Virginia.     Force,  vol.  iii. 
6  Berkeley's  report.     Hening,  vol.  ii.  p.  515. 

«  Culpepper's  report.     Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  lxxx.  p.  339.  25 


386    GENERAL   VIEW  OF  THE  SOUTHERN  COLONIES. 

of  industry.  As  early  as  1708  we  are  told  that  three-fifths  of  the 
population  were  blacks.1  This  alteration  in  the  relative  numbers 
of  white  servants  and  black  slaves  was  accelerated  by  a  change 
which  had  come  over  the  commercial  policy  of  the  English  gov- 
ernment. In  1662  the  Royal  African  Company  was  incorpo- 
rated. At  the  head  of  it  was  the  Duke  of  York,  and  the  king 
himself  was  a  large  shareholder.  The  chief  profit  of  this  com- 
pany was  derived  from  the  exportation  of  negroes  from  Guinea 
to  the  plantations.  The  king  and  his  brother  henceforth  had  a 
direct  interest  in  limiting  the  supply  of  indented  servants,  and  it 
is  not  unlikely  that  this  explains  why  Jeffreys  for  once  deviated 
into  the  paths  of  humanity  and  justice.2 

Without  trusting  entirely  to  the  statistics  given  above,  we  can 
clearly  see  that  the  rapid  growth  of  negro  slavery  effectually  de- 
stroyed the  earlier  system.3  To  trace  out  that  process  in  detail 
would  be  a  study  of  the  greatest  economical  and  social  interest, 
but  unhappily  no  materials  for  doing  so  are  at  our  disposal.  As 
with  so  many  great  social  changes,  the  process  went  on  in  part 
unheeded,  in  part  unrecorded,  from  its  very  familiarity.  But 
though  we  cannot  follow  the  process  in  detail,  we  can  see  its  re- 
sults, and  we  can  easily  trace  some  at  least  of  the  conditions 
which  caused  them.  As  a  means  of  giving  the  peasant  proprie- 
tor the  necessary  apprenticeship  to  his  work,  of  acclimatizing  him 
to  the  country  and  enabling  him  to  accumulate  capital  by  his  own 
labor,  it  might  have  been  successful.  Had  negro  slavery  never 
existed,  had  the  natural  resources  of  the  southern  colonies  favored 
the  growth  of  a  free  yeomanry,  the  system  of  indenture  would 
have  been  admirably  fitted  to  establish  a  population  of  small  pro- 
prietors, trained  in  habits  of  industry  and  in  a  competent  knowl- 
edge of  agriculture.  The  social  and  industrial  life  of  the  colonies 
forbade  this.  A  peasant  proprietary  can  only  exist  under  severe 
restraints  as  to  increase,  or  where  there  is  urban  life  to  take  off 
the  surplus  population  for  trades  and  handicrafts.  The  southern 
colonies  fulfilled  neither  of  these  conditions.  When  the  servant 
was  out  of  his  indentures  there  was  no  place  for  him.  He  could 
not  become  a  shopkeeper  or  craftsman,  or  a  free  agricultural 

1  Rivers,  p.  232. 

*  Thus  Lord  Howard  of  Effingham,  when  Governor  of  Virginia,  is  specially  instructed  by 
the  king  to  watch  the  interests  of  the  Royal  African  Company  in  the  matter  of  the  slave  trade. 
Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  lxxxiii.  p.  129. 

3  "  These  servants  are  but  an  insignificant  number  when  compared  with  the  vast  shoals  of 
negroes." — The  Present  State  of  Virginia,  by  Hugh  Jones,  1724. 


DIFFICULTIES  OF  THE  EARLIER  SYSTEM.         387 

laborer,  for  none  of  these  callings  existed.  Moreover,  the  very 
same  conditions  of  soil  and  climate  which  enabled  slavery  to  ex- 
ist, made  it  possible  for  the  freeman  to  procure  a  scanty  liveli- 
hood without  any  habits  of  settled  industry.  Thus  the  liberated 
servant  became  an  idler,  socially  corrupt,  and  often  politically 
dangerous.  He  furnished  that  class,  justly  described  by  a  Virgin- 
ian of  that  day,  as  "  a  fceculum  of  beings  called  overseers,  a  most 
abject  unprincipled  race."  l  He  was  the  forerunner,  and  possibly 
in  some  degree  the  progenitor,  of  that  class  who  did  so  much  to 
intensify  the  evils  of  slavery,  the  "  mean  whites  "  of  later  times. 

The  system  was  attended  with  another  more  direct  and  obvious 
peril.  The  political  prisoner  might  find  allies  and  sympathizers 
among  the  free  population  and  thus  become  a  source  of  danger. 
An  illustration  of  this  is  furnished  by  the  successive  enactments 
passed  by  the  Maryland  legislature,  for  limiting  the  importation 
of  Irish  Papists.2 

Negro  slavery  was  at  least  free  from  all  these  drawbacks  and 
from  the  difficulties  of  kidnapping.  The  negro,  too,  was  a  more 
enduring  and  less  costly  instrument  than  the  white  servant.  The 
slave  for  life  would  far  more  readily  take  his  place  as  one  of  an 
organized  gang,  working  with  the  mechanical  obedience  of  a 
plough-ox  or  a  cart-horse,  than  would  the  indented  servant  who 
was  looking  forward  to  the  time  of  freedom.  We  may  also  be- 
lieve that  humane  considerations  had  their  share  in  determining 
the  preference  for  the  negro  slave  over  the  white  servant.  We 
may  be  sure  that  many  a  planter  who  thought  nothing  of  the  hor- 
rors of  the  middle  passage  or  the  hardships  of  the  slave  gang  in 
the  case  of  the  negro,  shrank  from  subjecting  his  own  countrymen 
to  such  misery.  And  when  once  negro  slavery  was  firmly  estab- 
lished, any  rival  form  of  industry  was  doomed.  For  it  is  an 
economical  law  of  slavery,  that  where  it  exists  it  must  exist  with- 
out a  rival.  It  can  only  succeed  where  it  is  a  predominant  form 
of  labor.  The  utility  of  the  slave  is  that  of  a  machine.  When 
once  he  has  been  trained  to  any  special  kind  of  industry,  no  at- 
tempts to  enlarge  his  sphere  of  activity  can  be  attended  with 
profit.  The  time  given  to  the  new  acquisition  is  so  much  waste, 
and  his  mental  incapacity  and  absence  of  any  moral  interest  in 
his  work  almost  necessarily  limits  him  to  a  single  task.  Thus, 
as  we  have  seen,  the  many  attempts  to  develop  varied  forms  of 
production  in  the  southern  colonies  all  failed.      Maryland  and 

1  A  private  letter  quoted  in  Wirt's  Life  of  Patrick  Henry. 

2  Bacon,  1699,  ch.  xxiii. ;  1704,  ch.  xxxiii. ;   1712,  ch.  xxii. ;  1715,  ch.  xxxvi. 


388    GENERAL   VIEW  OF  THE  SOUTHERN  COLONIES. 

Virginia  grew  only  tobacco,  South  Carolina  grew  mainly  rice. 
Moreover,  the  spectacle  of  the  free  laborer  working  on  the  same 
soil  and  at  the  same  task,  would  be  fatal  to  that  resignation  and 
that  complete  moral  and  intellectual  subjection,  which  alone  can 
make  slave  labor  possible.  Thus  the  cheaper  and  more  efficient 
system  obtained  the  mastery  so  completely  that  by  the  beginning 
of  the  eighteenth  century  slave  and  negro  had  become  well-nigh 
synonymous  terms. 

The  new  system,  indeed,  did  not  win  the  day  wholly  without  a 
struggle.  A  Virginian  clergyman  writing  in  1724  deplores  the  num- 
ber of  negroes  and  the  consequent  discouragement  to  the  poorer 
class  of  white  emigrants.1  In  South  Carolina  more  than  one  attempt 
was  made  to  stem  the  tide.  In  1678  an  Act  was  passed  offering  a 
bounty  on  the  importation  of  indented  white  servants,  Irish  only 
excepted.  That  they  were  designed  to  counteract  the  influx  of 
black  slaves  is  shown  by  the  provision  that  they  were  to  be  dis- 
tributed among  the  planters,  one  to  every  six  negroes.2  In  1 7 1 2 
la  more  elaborate  attempt  was  made  in  the  same  direction.  An 
Act  was  passed  which  declared  in  its  preamble  the  importance  of 
increasing  the  numbers  of  the  population.3  A  bounty  of  four- 
teen pounds  a  head  was  offered  for  the  importation  of  British 
subjects  between  twelve  and  thirty  years  of  age.  They  were  not 
to  be  criminals,  and  any  attempt  to  evade  this  condition  was  to 
be  punished  by  a  fine  of  twenty-five  pounds.  This  seems  to  have 
had  some  immediate  result,  since  five  years  later  it  was  found 
necessary  to  pass  an  Act  for  the  better  government  of  white  ser- 
vants, of  whom  great  numbers  had  lately  come  over.4  In  17 19 
the  Assembly  took  the  further  step  of  imposing  a  duty  of  forty 
pounds  on  all  imported  negroes.  Had  this  measure  been  carried 
it  must  have  put  an  end  to  the  slave  trade  as  far  as  South  Caro- 
lina was  concerned.  It  is  sad  to  think  that  such  a  measure  was 
frustrated  by  the  cupidity  and  jealousy  of  the  English  govern- 
ment. But  it  had  become  a  settled  maxim  of  colonial  policy  to 
allow  the  provincial  assemblies  no  control  over  external  trade, 
and  in  all  commercial  legislation  to  regard  the  profit  of  the  Eng- 
lish merchant  rather  than  the  social  and  industrial  well-being  of 
the  colonists.  The  Proprietors  and  the  crown  were  for  once 
united,  and  the  measure  was  vetoed.5 

1  Hugh  Jones,  as  above  quoted.     Cf.  p.  123. 

2  Cooper's  Laws  of  South  Carolina,  vol.  ii.  p.  153. 

*  Trott's  Laws  of  South  Carolina,  vol.  i.  p.  217.  4  lb.,  p.  312. 

*  See  page  375. 


FEELING  ABOUT  SLA  VERY. 


3S9 


If  the  colonists  were  not  wholly  blind  to  the  economical  mis- 
chiefs of  slavery,  there  are  no  traces  of  that  opposition  to  it  on 
Moral  humane  grounds  which  we  meet  with  at  a  later  day. 

about6  Here  and  there,  indeed,  the  more  obvious  evils  inci- 
siavery.  dental  to  slavery  called  forth  a  protest.  Thus  Morgan 
Godwyn,  in  his  "  Negroes'  Advocate,"  published  in  1680,  urges 
the  claims  of  the  slave  to  be  treated  as  a  being  capable  of  relig- 
ious influences  and  amenable  to  moral  laws,  and  denounces  the 
cruelty  of  West  India  planters  with  the  fervor  of  a  Las  Casas. 
In  Sothern's  play  of  "  Oroonoko  "  and  in  Addison's  adaptation 
of  the  story  of  Yarico  we  may  trace  a  dim  foreshadowing  of  later 
feeling.  Baxter,  too,  in  his  "  Christians'  Directory,"  reminds  the 
slave-master  that  he  can  have  but  a  limited  dominion  over  beings 
with  souls,  and  that  God  is  their  absolute  owner.  But  with  all 
these  writers  it  is  the  abuse  of  slavery  that  is  denounced,  the 
cruelty  and  injustice  which  attach  themselves  as  excrescences  to 
the  system.  It  needed  the  teaching  of  time  to  show  that  the 
whole  system  was  a  corrupt  one,  fatal  to  the  social  well-being  of 
a  community  because  fatal  to  free  industry  and  to  the  purity  of 
domestic  life. 

The  moral  evils  of  the  new  system  did  not  appear  in  their  full 
horror  till  a  later  day,  yet  we  can  trace  the  germs  of  them  from 
Legislation  the  very  outset.  The  indented  servant  was  not  un- 
sJav"ry.  frequently  the  subject  of  humane  interference,  both 
from  the  colonial  legislatures  and  from  the  English  government. 
Culpepper's  instructions  tell  him  to  induce  the  Assembly  to  pass 
an  Act  for  the  protection  of  servants,  and  he  replies  that  the 
laws  at  present  extant  are  sufficient  for  the  purpose,  but  that  be- 
tween bad  servants  and  bad  masters  the  matter  is  beset  with 
difficulties.  The  Maryland  Assembly  of  17 15,  which  applied 
itself  specially  to  the  whole  question,  passed  an  enactment  for  the 
same  purpose.1  The  terms  leave  it  doubtful  whether  the  Act 
was  intended  to  include  negroes  or  whether  its  benefits  were 
limited  to  indented  servants.  Be  that  as  it  may,  in  the  generality 
of  cases  where  legislation  dealt  with  the  negro,  it  was  only  to 
confirm  and  perpetuate  the  barrier  between  the  two  racesv  From 
the  outset  there  was  a  sharp  distinction  between  the  negro  and 
the  indented  servant.  No  hereditary  disqualification  attached  to 
the  latter.     He  was  not  one  of  a  race  of  bondsmen.     With  the 


1  Bacon's  Laws  of  Maryland. 


39° 


GENERAL   VIEW  OF  THE  SOUTHERN  COLONIES. 


negro  slavery  descended  from  parent  to  child.1  Nor  was  there 
any  prospect  of  a  fusion  between  the  races.  In  Maryland  and 
'Virginia  mixed  marriages  were  strictly  forbidden.2  At  the  same 
time  those  unlawful  unions  between  the  races,  which  at  a  later 
day  invested  slavery  with  its  worst  evils,  were  prohibited  under 
severe  penalties.  In  Virginia,  as  early  as  1637,  a  white  man  was 
obliged  to  do  public  penance  for  having  intercourse  with  a  negro 
woman.3  In  1691  a  law  was  passed  enacting  that  if  any  white 
woman  had  a  child  by  a  negro  she  should  be  fined  fifteen  pounds, 
or,  in  default  of  payment,  be  sold  for  five  years.4  In  Maryland 
any  sort  of  union  was  strictly  forbidden.5  The  white  settlers  of 
either  sex  who,  of  free  choice,  lowered  themselves  to  the  level  of 
the  servile  race,  were  treated  as  having  thereby  incurred  the  pen- 
alties which  attached  to  that  race.  The  separation  was  not 
merely  of  status,  but  of  color.  The  free  man,  black  or  white, 
who  had  intercourse  with  a  woman  of  the  opposite  race,  was  to 
become  a  slave  for  seven  years.  Nay,  more :  if  a  free  negro 
woman  had  a  child  by  a  man  of  her  own  race,  even  though  free, 
she  was  to  revert  to  a  state  of  slavery.  In  other  words,  she 
could  only  obtain  her  freedom  by  renouncing  her  race.  Among 
the  imperfect  records  of  legislation  in  South  Carolina  we  find  en- 
actments of  the  same  purport.6  The  language  in  which  these 
offenses  are  formally  described  forcibly  illustrates  the  feeling  with 
which  they  were  regarded.  Such  unions  are  "  unnatural  and 
inordinate."  7  The  wrhite  man  who  so  offended  "  defiled  his 
body  "  and  "  abused  himself  to  the  dishonor  of  God  and  shame 
of  Christianity."  8 

We  find  traces,  too,  of  that  watchful  dread  which  in  after  times 
became  so  strongly  marked  and  so  repulsive  a  feature  of  slavery. 
In  1687  we  find  Lord  Howard  reporting  to  the  Lords  of  Planta- 
tions that  a  negro  plot  had  been  discovered,  and  commenting  on 
the  dangerous  liberty  granted  to  slaves  of  walking  abroad  on  Sat- 
urdays and  Sundays,  and  meeting  at  the  funerals  of  their  friends.9 
In  Maryland  an  Act  passed  in  17 15  forbade  any  negro  to  go 
three  miles  without  a  pass,  or  to  carry  a  gun  beyond  the  limits  of 
his  master's  plantation.10 

1  Beverley,  p.  235.     Bacon,  171 5,  ch.  xliv.  23. 

s  Herring,  vol.  iii.  p.  453.     Bacon,  1715,  ch.  xliv.  25;  1717,  ch.  xiii.  5. 

8  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  552.  *  lb.,  vol.  ii.  p.  87. 

8  Bacon,  1715,  ch.  xliv.  26-8.  6  Trott,  vol.  i.  p.  318. 

7  Trott,  Laivs  of  South  Carolina,  vol.  i.  p.  318.  8  Hening,  vol.  i.  p.  1461 

9  Report  from  Howard.     Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  lxxxv. 

10  Bacon,  1715,  ch.  xliv.  33. 


GENERAL  EFFECTS  OF  SLAVERY.  3gI 

At  one  time,  indeed,  it  seemed  as  if  the  condition  of  the  negro 
was  destined  to  be  even  more  hopelessly  degraded.  The  plant- 
Reiigious  ers  in  Virginia  and  Maryland  withheld  baptism  from 
the  negro,  their  slaves  under  the  belief  that  it  would  be  illegal 
to  hold  Christian  men  in  bondage.  When  Culpepper  sought 
to  fulfill  that  part  of  his  instructions  which  specially  ordered  the 
conversion  of  the  negroes,  he  was  met  by  this  difficulty.  He 
seems,  however,  to  have  given  the  planters  an  authoritative  assur- 
ance that  conversion  to  Christianity  would  in  no  way  affect  the 
status  of  the  slave,  and  he  was  able  to  tell  the  English  govern- 
ment that  negroes  were  daily  christened.1  The  same  difficulty 
arose  in  Maryland  and  in  Carolina,  and  in  each  colony  it  was 
necessary  for  the  government  expressly  to  declare  that  baptism 
did  not  carry  with  it  any  claim  to  freedom.2 

It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  the  whole  order  bf  southern  soci- 
ety, its  manner  of  life  and  forms  of  industry,  were  fashioned  by 
General  in-  slavery.  We  have  already  seen  how  the  early  condi- 
siavery.°  tions  of  Virginian  life  tended  to  throw  the  land  of  the 
colony  into  the  hands  of  a  few  large  proprietors.  That  tendency 
was  confirmed  and  intensified  by  slavery.  For  slave  labor  can  only 
be  employed  profitably  in  large  gangs,  and  such  gangs  can  only 
be  worked  on  wide  territories  and  in  the  hands  of  great  capital- 
ists. In  Maryland  we  hear  of  thirteen  hundred  slaves  belonging 
to  a  single  master.3  In  Virginia  nine  hundred  seems  to  be  the 
largest  number  recorded.4  The  peculiar  industry  of  Carolina, 
rice-growing,  adapted  itself  better  to  moderate-sized  holdings. 
Thirty  slaves,  we  are  told,  was  the  average  staff  of  a  plantation.5 

In  this  way  the  possession  of  slaves  did  for  the  southern  colo- 
nies what  land  does  for  long-settled  countries.  Where  land  is 
Develop-  abundant  and  labor  and  cattle  dear,  there  is  no  likeli- 
a^iJtocracy.  hood  of  a  landed  aristocracy  growing  up.  No  one  will 
care  to  acquire  land  when  he  can  extract  no  profit  from  it.  If 
the  titular  supremacy  over  land  is  valued  as  among  the  highland- 
era  of  Scotland,  it  is  not  for  the  sake  of  the  soil  itself,  but  of  cer- 
tain rights  over  the  clansmen  which  that  supremacy  carries  with 
it.  Thus  in  primitive  society  cattle  is  the  measure  of  wealth,  and 
the  rich  man  is  not  he  who  can  let  land,  but  he  who  can  supply 

1  Colonial  Entry  Book,  No.  Ixxxii.  pp.  90,  140.     Cf.  Hugh  Jones,  p.  70. 

2  Bacon,  1715,  ch.  xliv.  24.     Trott,  vol.  i.  p.  213. 

3  Terra  Maria:,  p.  201.  4  Hugh  Jones,  p.  37. 
6  Description  of  South  Carolina,  in  Carroll,  ii.  202. 


392 


GENERAL   VIEW  OF  THE  SOUTHERN  COLONIES. 


his  inferiors  with  live  stock.  If  the  southern  colonies  had  de 
pended  on  free  labor  a  tract  of  land  in  Virginia  or  Maryland 
would  have  been  a  merely  nominal  property.  Slavery  came  in 
as  the  one  means  by  which  the  capitalist  could  assert  his  superior- 
ity over  the  man  who  owned  nothing  but  his  own  labor.  The 
result  was  the  establishment  of  a  landed  aristocracy,  a  result  which 
was  facilitated  by  the  tastes  and  tendencies  which  the  southern 
colonists  had  carried  to  their  new  homes.  But  it  must  be  re- 
membered that  the  soutnern  planter  was  primarily  a  slaveholder 
and  only  incidentally  a  landowner.  His  estate  was  merely  a 
needful  condition  for  utilizing  the  capital  which  he  had  invested 
in  human  labor. 

Thus  grew  up  that  strange  form  of  life  peculiar  to  slave-holding 
states,  such  as  the  southern  colonies  of  America  and  the  West  In- 
Sociai  life  ^ian  islands.  Each  plantation  became  a  separate  commu  - 
Southern  n*ty'  we^"mgn  independent  and  self-supporting,  There 
colonies.  were  no  towns  and  consequently  no  shops.  The  freeman 
rebelled  against  the  idea  of  becoming  a  laborer,  and  thus  there 
were  no  artisans.  Beyond  the  rough  clothing  of  the  slaves,  almost 
every  necessary  of  life  was  brought  from  England.  Clothes, 
shoes,  household  furniture,  crockery,  even  wooden  bowls,  were 
imported.1  Such  was  the  lack  of  mechanical  skill  that  we  even 
hear  of  the  timber  for  a  house  being  sent  in  the  rough  to  Eng- 
land, and  returned  fashioned  and  ready  to  be  put  together.2 
Fifty  years  later  Jefferson  wrote,  "  While  we  have  land  to  labor 
let  us  never  wish  to  see  our  citizens  occupied  at  a  work-bench  or 
twirling  a  distaff."  3 

In  this  state  of  things  is  to  be  found  an  explanation  of  a  phe- 
nomenon which  meets  us  at  every  turn  in  Virginian  history.  Al- 
Want  of  most  from  its  earliest  days'  the  community  relapsed  into 
coinage.  a  state  0f  baiter.  Constant  efforts  were  made  to  en- 
force payment  in  coin  but  in  vain.  In  1645  the  Assembly  fixed 
a  legal  value  for  Spanish  coins" and  entertained  proposals  for  a 
copper  coinage  of  its  own.4  We  have  seen  how  Culpepper  at- 
tempted to  combine  the  functions  of  a  reforming  governor  and  a 
successful  speculator.5  All  these  attempts  failed,  as  any  attempt 
must  fail  which  seeks  to  force  upon  a  community  by  enactment  an 
article  which  it  does  not  want.     Tobacco,  as  the  staple  product  of 

1  Beverley,  p.  255.     See,  too,  the  account  of  Virginia  in  the  New  General  Atlas,  1721. 

2  Calendar  of  Virginian  State  Papers,  by  W.  P.  Palmer.     Introduction,  p.  lv. 

*  State  of  Virginia,  p.  275. 

*  Hening,  vol  i.  p,  308.  8  See  page  263. 


WANT  OF  COIN.  -    - 

the  country,  established  itself  as  the  accepted  medium  of  exchange. 
Legal  dues  were  commuted  for  tobacco  at  a  fixed  rate,  and,  as 
might  be  supposed,  the  fluctuations  of  the  yearly  crop  gave  rise 
to  constant  disputes  and  to  alleged  hardships  in  the  case  of  the 
clergy  and  other  recipients  of  fixed  incomes.1  The  same  thing 
happened  in  Maryland.  There  Cecilius  Calvert  established  a 
coinage,  but  his  attempts  to  bring  it  into  circulation  were  un- 
availing, and,  as  in  Virginia,  tobacco  took  the  place  of  money.2 

The  reason  is  not  far  to  seek.  The  demand  for  ready  money  is 
mainly  due  to  two  causes,  retail  trade  and  the  necessity  for  a  wage- 
fund.  In  the  southern  states  neither  of  these  existed.  The 
isolated,  self-supporting  life  of  the  plantation  made  ready  money 
almost  a  superfluity.  No  artisan  or  peasant  came  for  weekly 
wages,  no  shopkeeper  sent  in  his  account.  The  planter  shipped 
his  tobacco  to  England  and  received  the  value  in  bills,  which  in 
turn  were  paid  to  the  English  merchant  for  necessities  imported 
to  Virginia.3 

Another  condition  which  checked  any  influx  of  money  was  the  [ 
fact  that  the  planter  was  almost  invariably  indebted  to  the  mer-  \ 
chant.4  That,  indeed,  is  an  almost  inevitable  phenomenon  of 
slavery.  For  of  all  forms  of  industry  connected  with  land,  that  of 
the  slaveholder  is  the  one  which  requires  the  largest  capital  in 
proportion  to  the  extent  of  his  operations.  Just  as  the  man  who 
farms  his  own  freehold  needs  more  capital  than  the  man  who 
rents  a  farm  of  the  same  size,  so  the  man  who  buys  his  labor  in 
a  mass  before  he  begins  his  operations  needs  more  capital  than 
the  man  who  pays  for  it  in  monthly  or  weekly  wages.  Thus  the  \ 
constant  tendency  of  the  planter  is  to  enlarge  or  facilitate  his 
operations  by  raising  fresh  capital,  while  his  stock  of  slaves  offers 
him  a  ready  means,  and  consequently  an  inducement,  for  borrow- 
ing money.  Thus  we  can  explain  those  constant  lamentations 
over  the  poverty-stricken  and  indebted  condition  of  the  planters 
which  fill  the  letters  of  every  colonial  Governor  and  agent  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  seventeenth  century. 

One  conspicuous  result  of  the  absence  of  urban  life  was  that 
lack  of  education  which  Blair  and  Beverley  deplore.     It  was  not 

1  It  is  needless  to  give  references  for  a  phenomenon  which  is  constantly  meeting  us.  The 
disputes  concerning  the  payment  of  dues  to  the  clergy  gave  rise  to  a  memorable  episode  in 
Virginian  history,  the  first  success  won  by  Patrick  Henry  as  an  orator. 

2  See  Crosby's  Early  Coins  of  America,  p.  124. 
8  Hugh  Jones,  p.  86. 

4  This  is  stated  in  the  letters  of  Ludwell,  Nicholson,  and  others. 


394    GENERAL   VIEW  OF  THE  SOUTHERN  COLONIES. 

upon  the  upper  classes  that  the  evil  of  this  state  of  things  main- 
ly fell.  The  rich  planter  could  have  a  private  tutor  for  his  sons 
Want  of  or  send  them  for  education  to  England.  But  in  the 
education,  absence  of  schools  the  small  freeholder,  so  far  as  such 
a  class  existed,  grew  up  with  tastes  and  habits  little  above  those  of 
the  savage  whom  he  had  supplanted.  In  Carolina,  indeed,  ow- 
ing to  the  existence  of  a  real  capital  town,  and  to  the  smaller 
size  and  consequently  the  greater  proximity  of  the  plantations, 
there  was  more  of  an  approach  to  urban  life.  There,  as  in  Vir- 
ginia, the  artisan  and  the  free  laborer  formed  no  important  ele- 
ment in  society,  but  the  planter  himself  attained  a  higher  degree 
of  social  refinement  and  mental  culture. 

As  yet  we  have  been  considering  the  worse  side  of  southern 
life.  It  would  be  unfair  to  the  system  to  overlook  its  better 
Compensat-  aspects.  The  southern  planter,  could  hardly  sink  into 
ta!esdo?n~  tne  stagnant  life  of  an  uneducated  squire  in  a  remote 
slavery.  English  county  in  the  last  century.  To  manage  a 
plantation,  with  its  overseers  and  its  slave  population  of  either 
sex,  and  all  ages,  of  various  tempers  and  degrees  of  capacity,  was 
to  administer  a  little  commonwealth.  The  planter,  too,  was  a 
merchant  as  well.  Doubtless  his  life  might  degenerate  into  one 
of  tyranny,  caprice  and  self-indulgence,  but  the  system  was  one 
under  which  such  failings  brought  their  own  punishment,  and  in 
which  clear  intelligence  and  energy  of  purpose  could  not  but 
stand  out  prominent  and  successful. 

The  system,  too,  was  one  whose  very  faults  contributed  to  its 
cohesion  and  in  a  measure  to  its  strength.  '  The  southern  Slave- 
holders had  the  vices  of  an  oligarchy,  but  they  had  also  its  self- 
reliance,  its  organization,  and  its  self-respect.  They  felt  them- 
selves raised  above  the  small  white  freeholder,  and  not  only  raised 
above,  but  united  against,  the  negro  slave.  The  oligarchy  of, 
landowners  was  not  broken  up  by  any  of  those  cross  divisions 
and  sectional  interests  which  make  themselves  felt  in  an  old 
country  with  its  wider  interests  and  more  varied  pursuits.  The 
learned  professions  could  hardly  be  said  to  exist.  Thus  whatever 
energy  and  ability  the  planter  possessed  has  been  devoted,  firstly, 
to  the  affairs  of  the  little  commonwealth  over  which  he  ruled, 
and  then  to  discharging,  without  pay  and  from  sense  of  obliga- 
tion, his  duties  as  a  member  of  a  governing  caste.  The  southern 
colonies  were  in  full  what  England  always  was  in  part,  commu- 
nities governed  by  an  unpaid  aristocracy  of  wealth  and  birth. 
The  Governor  and  Secretary  indeed  received  salaries.     But  the 


COMPENSA  TING  AD  VANTA  GES  OF  SLA  VER  Y.      395 

richer  planters  discharged  without  pay  the  duties  of  Councilors, 
of  sheriffs,  and  of  county  magistrates,  offices  to  which  attached 
nearly  all  the  executive  and  many  of  the  judicial  duties  which 
existed  in  the  colony.  The  organization  .of  a  Virginian  county 
was  what  the  organization  of  an  English  county  would  be,  if  it 
were  suddenly  emancipated  from  the  control  of  the  various  cen- 
tral departments  with  which  it  is  constantly  brought  in  contact. 

Moreover,  the  habits  of  the  country,  the  lack  of  inns,  the  open 
and  unquestioning  hospitality  granted  to  the  traveler  at  every 
Aristocratic  plantation,  kept  up  a  free  and  neighborly  intercourse 
feeling.  between  the  settlers.  The  richer  families  became  con- 
nected by  an  unbroken  chain  of  close  intermarriages.  Thus  in 
Virginia  a  strong  sense  of  caste  grew  up  among  the  dominant 
order.  The  leading  Virginians  of  a  later  day  traced  their  pedi- 
grees back  to  the  companions  of  Smith  and  the  followers  of  Dale 
with  all  the  pride  of  a  Dering  or  a  Courtenay.  Offices  were 
handed  down  from  father  to  son,  and  the  social  and  political 
usages  of  the  country  acquired  all  the  tenacity  of  hereditary  pre- 
scription. 

In  South  Carolina  country  life  played  a  less  important  part. 
But  the  oligarchical  spirit,  if  weaker  in  that  respect,  was  fortified 
Peculiar!-  by  otner  influences.  The  city  life  of  Charlestown  de- 
ties  of         veloped    an    amount   of   mental    culture    which   was 

South  ■*■  „ 

Carolina,  denied  to  the  Virginian  planter.1  In  South  Carolina, 
as  in  the  communities  of  the  ancient  world,  a  system  of  agricul- 
ture founded  on  slave  labor  was  the  condition  under  which  a  city 
population  led  a  life  of  cultivated  leisure.  This  and  the  vast 
dimensions  which  slavery  soon  reached  intensified  the  feeling 
which  bound  together  the  oligarchy  of  slaveholders. 

Thus  the  prejudices  of  race,  strengthened  by  the  conscious- 
ness of  higher  intelligence  and  culture,  acquired  an  intensity  un- 
known elsewhere,  and  South  Carolina  became  the  very  type  of  a 
slave-holding  aristocracy.  If  slavery  had  been  confined  to  Vir- 
ginia and  Maryland,  it  might  have  died  out  in  the  eighteenth 
century,  crushed  beneath  the  weight  of  its  moral  and  economical 
shortcomings.  In  Carolina  it  became  a  corner-stone  of  the  polit- 
ical system,  a  motive  power  in  the  world's  history. 

l  Lawson,  p.  3.  "They  have  a  considerable  trade  both  to  Europe  and  the  West  Indies, 
whereby  they  become  rich  and  are  supplied  with  all  things  necessary  for  trade  and  genteel 
living  which  several  other  places  fall  short  of.  Their  cohabiting  in  a  town  has  drawn  to  them 
ingenious  people  of  most  sciences,  whereby  they  have  tutors  amongst  them  that  educate  their 
youth  a  la  mode." 


r 


APPENDICES, 


APPENDIX  A. 

The  Name  Indian,  p.  10. 

The  Spanish  writers  from  the  outset,  beginning  with  Columbus  in 
his  letters,  called  the  natives  of  America,  Indians,  and  their  English 
translators  do  the  same.  So,  too,  Richard  Eden,  the  earliest  English 
writer  on  American  travel,  applies  the  name  to  the  natives  of  Peru 
and  Mexico.  It  is  used  in  the  same  way,  both  in  translations  and 
original  accounts,  during  the  rest  of  the  century,  but  it  is  always  lim- 
ited to  those  races  with  whom  the  Spaniards  were  in  contact.  In  its 
wider  and  later  application  the  word  does  not  seem  to  have  established 
itself  in  English  till  the  next  century.  The  earliest  instance  I  can 
find,  where  it  is  applied  to  the  natives  of  North  America  generally  in 
any  original  work,  is  by  Hakluyt.  In  1587  he  translated  Laudon- 
niere's  "History  of  the  French  Colony  in  Florida,"  and  dedicated  his 
translation  to  Sir  Walter  Raleigh.  In  this  dedication  he  once  uses 
the  term  Indian  for  the  natives  of  North  America.  Heriot  and  the 
other  writers  who  describe  the  various  attempts  at  settlement  in  Vir- 
ginia during  the  sixteenth  century,  invariably  called  the  natives 
"savages."  Perhaps  the  earliest  instance  where  an  English  writer 
uses  the  name  Indian  specially  to  describe  the  occupants  of  the  land 
afterwards  colonized  by  the  English  is  in  the  account  of  Archer's 
voyage  to  Virginia  in  1602.  This  account,  written  by  James  Rosier, 
is  published  in  Purchas  (vol.  iv.  b.  viii.),  From  that  time  onward  the 
use  of  the  term  in  the  wider  sense  becomes  more  common.  We  may 
reasonably  infer  that  the  use  of  it  was  an  indication  of  the  growing 
knowledge  of  the  fact  that  the  lands  conquered  by  the  Spaniards  and 
those  explored  by  the  English  formed  one  continent. 

397 


398  APPENDIX  B. 

APPENDIX  B. 

Hereditary  Succession  among  the  Indians,  p.   14. 

The  system  of  succession  among  the  Indians  is  a  matter  of  interest, 
as  throwing  some  light  on  the  special  stage  of  development  which  the 
North  American  savages  had  reached  when  first  discovered  by  Euro- 
pean voyagers. 

Among  the  Virginians  and  also  among  the  Iroquois  or  Five  Nations, 
the  system  of  succession  through  females  prevailed.  All  kinship  for 
purposes  of  succession  to  the  chieftainship  was  reckoned  through  the 
mother.  The  deceased  chief  was  succeeded  by  his  eldest  uterine 
brother ;  when  the  stock  of  brothers  was  exhausted,  the  succession 
devolved  on  the  eldest  uterine  nephew,  unless,  indeed,  the  sisters  of 
the  deceased  intervened.  That  this  was  so  is  distinctly  stated  by 
Strachey  (p.  53).  and  his  statement  is  in  some  measure  borne  out  by 
the  not  unfrequent  mention  of  queens  and  female  chiefs. 

The  researches  of  the  late  Mr.  McLennan  and  others  who  have  fol- 
lowed the  same  line  of  inquiry  may  be  considered  to  have  clearly 
established  the  view,  that  this  mode  of  succession  is  a  relic  of  the 
time  when  promiscuous  intercourse,  or  polyandry,  was  the  prevailing 
usage,  and  when  consequently  certainty  in  kinship  could  only  be  found 
on  the  mother's  side,  and  that  it  therefore  belongs  to  an  earlier  stage 
of  society  than  the  more  familiar  system  of  succession  through  males. 

At  the  same  time  the  system  of  succession  through  females,  although 
it  obtained  among  the  Virginians  and  the  Iroquois,  was  not  universal 
among  the  American  Indians,  and  in  modern  times  at  least  not  even 
common. 

Alexander,  the  chief  of  the  Narragan setts,  brother  and  predecessor 
to  Philip,  the  great  enemy  of  the  English  settlers,  succeeded  his  father 
Massasoit.  Catlin  distinctly  tells  us  (vol.  i.  p.  192)  that  "  it  is  a  general, 
though  not  an  infallible,  rule  among  the  numerous  tribes  of  North 
American  Indians  that  the  office  of  chief  belongs  to  the  eldest  son  of 
a  chief,  provided  he  shows  himself  by  his  conduct  to  be  equally  worthy 
of  it  as  any  other  in  the  nation  ;  making  it  hereditary  on  a  very  proper 
condition — in  default  of  which,  or  others  which  may  happen,  the  office 
is  elective."  From  this  passage  it  is  clear  that  Catlin  knew  of  only 
two  alternatives,  election  and  succession  in  the  male  line,  and  it  is 
most  unlikely  that  a  shrewd  observer,  as  he  was,  would  have  over- 
looked so  peculiar  and  anomalous  a  system  as  succession  through 
females,  had  it  been  at  all  widely  spread. 

Now  it  is  also  noteworthy  that  not  only  Catlin,  but  also  various 
writers  in  Schoolcraft's  collection,  dwell  on  the  lax  nature  of  the 
chief's  authority,  and  that  more  than  one  of  them  distinctly  speaks  of 
the  existing  system  of  chieftainship  as  a  novelty.  Thus  Mr.  Prescott 
(vol.  iii.  p.  182)  says  that  "the  chieftainship  (among  the  Sioux)  is  of 


APPENDIX  C.  399 

modern  date."  Another  writer,  Mr.  Eakes,  whose  information  was 
obtained  by  word  of  mouth  from  a  Creek  chief,  says  that  in  that  tribe 
"  the  chiefs  were  not  originally  hereditary ;  the  descent  was  in  the 
female  line.  This  custom  has  become  extinct.  The  chiefs  are  now 
chosen  by  the  Council."  It  is  almost  needless  to  point  out  that  in 
the  above  extract  "  hereditary  "  means  transmitted  from  father  to  son. 
From  this  we  may  conclude  almost  with  certainty  that  the  system 
which  the  first  European  voyagers  found  extant  in  Virginia,  and  which 
survived  till  later  times  among  the  Five  Nations,  had  elsewhere  re- 
cently given  way  to  the  system  of  male  succession  or  of  election,  while 
those  were  in  the  present  century  regarded  as  novelties,  and  the 
authority  which  they  gave  had  not  yet  acquired  tlje  strength  of  long- 
established  usage. 

— WW 

APPENDIX~C 

The  Cabots  and  their  Voyages,  p.  23. 

The  voyages  of  the  Cabots,  or  of  Sebastian  Cabot,  have  been  a 
strange  stumbling-block  to  historians.  The  acme  of  confusion  was 
reached  when  a  living  writer,  Mr.  Froude,  told  us  that  in  1497  Sebas- 
tian Cabot  was  "  a  little  boy  !  " 

Two  writers  have  made  a  special  study  of  the  career  of  Sebas- 
tian Cabot.  These  are  Mr.  Biddle  and  Mr.  Nicholls,  and  from  a 
comparison  of  their  writings  with  the  original  authorities  we  can 
obtain  a  fairly  clear  idea  of  the  question,  though  certain  details  must 
still  remain  matters  of  uncertainty.  Messrs.  Bryant  and  Gay  have  ,^ 
also  dealt  with  the  subject  in  a  clear  and  comprehensive  manner.        *\ 

The  main  points  about  Sebastian  Cabot  on  which  doubt  has  arisen  t  )Q 
are: 

1.  His  birthplace. 

2.  The  number  of  his  voyages  made  from  England  before  1500.        *-S 

3.  The  extent  of  these  voyages  respectively. 

4.  The  relative  parts' played  by  John  and  Sebastian  Cabot. 
Before  entering  upon  these  questions  it  may  be  well  to  set  forth 

clearly  the  extent  and  nature  of  the  evidence  before  us. 
Of  strictly  contemporary  evidence  we  have : 

1 .  The  two  patents  referred  to  in  my  text.  These,  as  far  as  they 
go,  are  evidence  of  the  very  highest  order. 

2.  A  statement  in  "  Stow's  Annals,"  as  follows: 
"  This  yeare  (1498)  one  Sebastian  Gaboto,  a  Genoa's  son/born  in 

Bristow,  professing  himself  to  be  expert  in  knowledge  of  the  arch  of 
the  world  and  of  the  Islands  of  the  same,  as  by  his  charts  and  other 
reasonable  demonstrations  he  showed,  caused  the  king  to  man  and 
victual  a  ship  at  Bristow  to  search  for  an  island  which  he  knew  to  be 


4oo  APPENDIX  C. 

replenished  with  rich  commodities :  in  this  ship  divers  merchants  of 
London  adventured  small  stocks,  and  in  the  company  of  this  ship 
sailed  also  out  of  Bristow  three  or  four  ships  fraught  with  sleight  and 
gross  wares." 

This  extract  is  to  be  found  p.  804,  in  the  first  edition  of  "  Stow's 
Annals,"  published  in  1605.  Nevertheless  I  venture  to  call  it  a  con- 
temporary authority  since  Stow,  who  was  a  painstaking  and  accurate 
antiquary,  professes  to  have  derived  it  from  an  unpublished  MS.  writ- 
ten by  Robert  Fabian. 

This  passage  was  privately  communicated  by  Stow  to  Hakluyt, 
before  "  Stow's  Annals  "  appeared.  It  was  first  published  in  "  Hak- 
luyt's  Divers  Voyages,"  in  1582.  It  there  bears  the  heading,  "A  note 
of  Sebastian  Cabot's  first  discovery  of  part  of  the  Indies,  taken  out 
of  the  latter  part  of  Robert  Fabian's  Chronicle,  not  hitherto  printed, 
which  is  in  the  custody  of  Mr.  John  Stow,  a  diligent  preserver  of 
antiquities."  In  the  statement  itself,  Hakluyt,  who  evidently  knew  a 
portion  of  the  history  of  the  Cabot  family,  but  not  the  whole,  altered 
"a  Genoa's  son"  to  "a  Venetian."  In  his  later  and  greater  work 
he  republished  the  extract,  but  with  a  still  further  change.  He  sub- 
stitutes John  for  Sebastian,  leaving  his  former  heading.  Of  this 
change  I  shall  have  more  to  say  hereafter. 

3.  A  letter  from  Lorenzo  Pasqualigo,  the  Venetian  ambassador  in 
England,  published  by  Mr.  Rawdon  Brown,  in  his  "Calendar  of 
Venetian  State  Papers,"  Sept.  11,  1497.  We  do  not  know  enough  of 
Pasqualigo  to  judge  how  far  he  may  be  fully  trusted.  We  may, 
however,  be  sure  that  he  can  be  relied  on  in  matters  of  general  noto- 
riety. The  main  points  in  this  letter  are :  that  a  Venetian  called  Juan 
Cabot  had  sailed  from  Bristol  to  discover  new  lands ;  that  seven 
hundred  leagues  from  England  he  had  found  the  territory  of  the  Great 
Cham  ;  that  he  had  coasted  for  three  hundred  leagues  and  landed, 
seeing  no  human  beings,  but  finding,  with  other  signs  of  human  hab- 
itation, some  snares  for  game  and  a  needle,  which  he  brought  home. 
Next  year  he  was  to  sail  with  ten  ships.  In  the  mean  time  he  lived  at 
Bristol,  paid  by  the  king  and  honored  by  all  men.  This  letter  is  dated 
August  27, 1497. 

4.  Another  extract  from  the  Venetian  Archives,  dated  August  24, 
1497.  This  is  only  a  bare  statement  of  the  facts  recorded  in  Pas- 
qualigo's  letter,  with  the  one  detail  added,  that  the  first  voyage  was 
made  at  the  king's  expense.  Moreover,  the  number  of  ships  to  be 
sent  in  the  next  year  is  increased  from  ten  to  fifteen  or  twenty. 

5.  The  extract  referred  to  in  my  text  from  the  Privy  Purse  Ex- 
penses :  "  To  him  that  found  the  new  Isle  10/.;  "  and  also  certain 
references  in  the  same  papers  to  a  voyage  in  1498. 

Besides  these  definite  contemporary  records  we  have  a  statement 
which  may  or  may  not  be  contemporary,  extracted  from  a  Bristol  MS. 


APPENDIX  C.  4Q1 

by  Mr.  Barrett  in  his  history  of  Bristol  which  states :  "  In  the  year 
1497,  the  24th  of  June,  on  St.  John's  day,  was  Newfoundland  found 
by  Bristol  men  in  a  ship  called  the  Matthew." 

There  are  also  various  original  but  not  strictly  contemporary  au- 
thorities.    Those  worthy  of  attention  are  : 

1.  A  map  extant  in  the  "  Bibliotheque  Impe>iale  "  in  Paris,  dated 
1544,  with  the  following  inscription:  "  Terram  hanc  olim  nobis 
clausam  aperuit  Johannes  Cabotus  Venetus  necnon  Sebastianus  Cabo- 
tus  ejus  nlius  anno  ab  orbe  redempto,  1494,  die  vero  24  Junii  hora  5, 
ut  diluculo  quam  terram  primum  visam  appellarunt  et  insulam  quan- 
dam  in  oppositam  insulam  divi  Johannis  nominarunt  quippe  quae 
solemni  die  festo  divi  Joannis  aperte  {sic)  fuit."  I  quote  this  from 
Mr.  Nicholls,  p.  29.  The  map  itself  is  attributed  to  Cabot.  But  did 
he  add  the  inscription  ? 

2.  An  extract  published  by  Hakluyt  with  the  statement  that  it  was 
"  taken  out  of  the  map  of  Sebastian  Cabot  by  Clement  Adams,  con- 
cerning his  discovery  of  the  West  Indies,  which  is  to  be  seen  in  her 
Majesties  privie  gallerie  at  Westminster,  and  in  many  other  mer- 
chants' houses."  The  text  of  the  extract  itself  is,  "Anno  Domini 
1497  Joannes  Cabotus  Venetus  et  Sebastianus  illius  Alius  earn  terram 
fecerunt  perviam  quam  nullus  prius  aduc  ausus  fuit,  die  24  Junii, 
circiter  horam  quintam  bene  mane.  Hanc  autem  appellavit  terram 
primum  visam  credo  quod  ex  mari  in  earn  partem  primum  oculos 
injecerat.  Nam  quae  ex  adverso  sita  est  insula,  earn  appellavit  insu- 
lam Divi  Johannis  hac  opinor  ratione  quod  aperta  fuit  eo  die  qui  est 
sacer  Divo  Johanni  Baptistae."  It  then  goes  on  to  describe  the  na- 
tives, their  dress  and  equipments,  and  the  beasts,  birds  and  fishes  of 
the  newly-discovered  land.  There  can,  I  think,  be  little  doubt  that 
the  map  which  this  accompanied  was  identical  with  that  of  iris,  anc 
that  the  written  description  differs  only  in  form.  Of  the  one  xeally  im- 
portant discrepancy  I  shall  have  more  to  say. 

3.  A  statement  made  by  Baptista  Ramusius.  He  was  a  Venetian, 
born  in  i486,  and  employed  in  the  service  of  the  Republic,  chiefly  in 
foreign  embassies.  His  principal  work,  a  "  History  of  Voyages," 
was  published  at  Venice  in  1550,  and  more  than  one  other  edition 
was  published  before  the  end  of  the  century.  This  was  translated 
by  Hakluyt.  It  contains  a  statement  of  what  Galearius  Butrigarius, 
the  Pope's  legate  in  Spain,  had  heard  from  certain  Venetians.  He  was 
told  in  Seville  that  Cabot,  the  great  scientific  navigator,  had  sailed 
with  two  ships  supplied  him  at  the  king's  cost  in  1496,  to  find  a 
northwest  passage  to  Cathay ;  that  he  failed,  and  so  sailed  along  the 
coast  southward  to  Florida  ;  that  he  then  returned  to  England, 
where  he  found  the  nation  busy  with  its  disputes  with  Scotland,  and  so 
disinclined  for  further  enterprises.  This,  it  is  clear,  is  very  poor  evi- 
dence, coming  as  it  does  third  hand. 

26 


402  APPENDIX  C. 

4.  The  same  Ramusius  in  the  preface  to  his  third  volume,  also 
translated  by  Hakluyt.  Ramusius  there  states  that  Cabot  sailed  at 
the  charges  of  Henry  VII.  to  67^  degrees  north  latitude,  and  reached 
his  northernmost  point  on  the  eleventh  of  June  :  that  he  believed  that 
he  would  find  a  northwest  passage,  but  was  hindered  by  the  mutiny 
of  his  ship-masters  and  passengers. 

5.  The  best  and  most  explicit  of  the  non-contemporary  authorities 
is  Peter  Martyr.  He  was  a  Milanese,  born  1455,  and  employed  in  the 
service  of  the  Spanish  Crown  from  1487  to  his  death  in  1526.  Few 
men  could  have  been  in  a  better  position  for  obtaining  authentic  in- 
formation as  to  the  voyages  of  the  age.  In  fact  his  great  work,  the 
"Decades  of  the  New  World,"  though  not  published  till  after  his 
death,  may  be  looked  on  as  having  all  the  weight  of  a  contemporary 
authority.  He  professes  to  have  been  an  intimate  friend  of  Cabot. 
He  states  that  Sebastian  Cabot  was  a  Venetian  by  blood  (genere 
Venetus),  and  that  he  was  taken  to  England  by  his  parents  while  yet 
young  (pene  infans).  Afterwards  he  furnished  two  ships  at  his  own 
cost,  and  with  three  hundred  men  sailed  towards  the  North  Pole.  He 
there,  in  July,  found  icebergs  and  almost  continuous  daylight.  At 
the  same  time,  the  sea  was  not  ice-bound  (Julio  mense  vastas  reperit 
glaciales  moles  pelago  natantes  et  lucem  fere  perpetuam,  tellure  tamen 
libera,  gelu  liquefacto).  Then,  of  necessity  (quare  coactus  fuit)  he 
sailed  south  into  the  latitudes  of  the  strait  of  Gibraltar,  passed  between 
Cuba  and  the  mainland,  and  encountered  the  Gulf  Stream.  He  found 
immense  shoals  of  tunnies,  people  clad  in  skins,  but  not  without  the 
use  of  reason,  and  bears  who  draw  the  fish  out  of  the  water.  He  also 
found  in  many  parts  copper  among  the  inhabitants.  This  appears  to 
me  to  be  the  most  valuable,  as  it  is  certainly  the  most  explicit,  testi- 
mony we  have.  If  we  are  to  accept  this  statement  and  Pasqualigo's 
as  both  literally  true,  they  must  refer  to  different  voyages.  It  is  clear 
that  the  voyage  in  which  no  inhabitants  were  seen  could  not  be  that 
in  which  he  found  copper  among  the  inhabitants  (Orichalcum  in 
plerisque  locis  se  vidisse  apud  incolas  prasdicat).  At  the  same  time, 
as  Pasqualigo  wrote  about  a  fortnight  after  Cabot's  return,  it  might 
well  be  that  he  erred  in  some  details. 

One  point  in  Peter  Martyr  is  worthy  of  notice.  What  is  meant  by 
"coactus"?  It  can  hardly  mean,  compelled  by  the  ice,  as  it  follows 
immediately  on  the  statement  that  the  sea  was  clear.  I  am  inclined 
to  think  that  it  must  mean,  compelled  by  the  mutiny  of  his  crew,  who 
refused  to  go  farther  into  the  world  of  icebergs  and  perpetual  day. 

6.  Lopez  de  Gomara,  a  Spanish  writer,  in  his  "  History  of  West 
Indies,"  published  in  1554,  states  that  Sebastian  Cabot,  a  Venetian, 
with  two  ships  and  three  hundred  men,  supplied,  some  say,  by  him- 
self, some,  by  the  king,  sailed  in  quest  of  Cathay  and  the  Spice  Islands, 
and  that  in  July  he  reached  58  degrees,  where  daylight  lasted  eighteen 


APPENDIX  C.  403 

hours.  The  cold  and  the  strangeness  of  the  land  prevented  his  going 
farther,  and  he  followed  the  coast  southward  to  38  degrees.  This 
statement  evidently  adds  nothing  of  importance  to  our  knowledge. 

7.  Finally,  we  have  a  statement  in  the  book  of  Robert  Thorne,  re- 
ferred to  in  my  text,  p.  36,  where  the  writer  states  that  his  father  and 
Hugh  Eliot,  another  Bristol  merchant,  "  discovered  the  Newfound- 
lands," etc.;  "if  the  mariners  would  have  been  ruled  and  followed 
their  pilot's  mind  the  West  Indies,  from  whence  all  the  gold  comes, 
had  been  theirs."  This  may  refer  to  one  of  the  voyages  made  before 
1 500,  but  it  is  equally  possible  that  it  refers  to  the  abortive  voyage  of 
Pert  and  Cabot  in  1 5 17. 

Writers  later  in  the  century,  like  Gilbert  and  Willes,  carry  no  special 
authority  with  them.  They  may  have  borrowed  from  one  another  or 
from  a  common  source ;  still,  a  consensus  on  any  one  point  among 
all  the  well-informed  writers  of  the  age  is  of  value  as  confirmatory 
evidence. 

I  propose  now  to  apply  the  aforesaid  authorities  to  the  points  in 
dispute. 

I.  As  to  Sebastian  Cabot's  birthplace.    . 

For  the  confusion  about  Cabot's  birthplace  he  is  himself  responsi- 
ble.    The  testimonies  on  the  subject  are  these : 

1.  Stow's  statement,  quoted  above. 

2.  A  perfectly  explicit  statement  by  Cabot's  friend  Eden  :  "  Sebas- 
tian Cabot  told  me  that  he  was  born  in  Bristol." 

As  against  this  we  have  Cabot's  own  statement  made  to  the  Vene- 
tian senate  that  he  was  born  in  their  city.  This  statement  was  made 
when  he  was  applying  for  employment  under  the  Republic.  Now,  on 
the  one  hand,  we  have  no  motive  for  the  statement  made  by  Stow 
and  Eden  beyond,  perhaps,  the  slight  and  vague  one  of  claiming  the 
great  navigator  for  a  countryman,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  we  have 
a  very  obvious  motive  for  deception  on  Cabot's  part.  It  is  easy  to 
see  how  Cabot  might  have  expected  his  statement  to  be  believed.  If 
he  had  spent  his  childhood  at  Venice  the  fact  of  his  birth  in  England 
might  well  have  been  obscured  and  forgotten.  The  error  about  Cabot's 
birthplace  has  doubtless  been  confirmed  by  a  mistake  of  Hakluyt's  in 
translating  the  passage  from  Peter  Martyr.  Martyr  calls  Sebastian 
"genere  Venetus."  Hakluyt  translates  this  "a  Venetian  born." 
Clearly  it  means  a  Venetian  by  extraction,  and  is  exactly  the  phrase 
which  would  be  used  to  describe  the  case  of  a  Venetian  citizen  born 
in  a  foreign  country. 

In  connection  with  this  subject  it  should  be  noticed  that  Mr. 
Nicholls  has  extracted  from  the  Venetian  Archives  the  decree  of  nat- 
uralization for  John  Cabot.  This  is  important  as  throwing  light  on 
Stow's  statement.  Stow  states  two  facts  concerning  Sebastian  Cabot's 
origin.     I.  That  his  father  was  a  Genoese.     2.  That  Sebastian  was 


404 


APPENDIX  C. 


born  in  Bristol.  The  Venetian  decree  makes  in  favor  of  the  first 
statement.  Eden  positively  confirms  the  second.  This  appears  to 
me  to  be  a  most  satisfactory  testimony  to  Stow's  value  as  a  witness 
on  the  Cabotian  question  generally. 

Mr.  Nicholls  furthermore  endeavors  to  deduce  from  the  Venetian 
decree  evidence  of  Sebastian  Cabot's  age.  He  assumes  that  the  time 
of  Sebastian  being  taken  to  Venice  must  have  been  identical  or  nearly 
so  with  that  of  his  father's  naturalization.  I  confess  I  cannot  see  the 
force  of  this.  Why  may  not  John  Cabot  have  lived  at  Venice  as  an 
alien  before  his  naturalization  ?  The  only  point  certain  seems  to  me 
to  be  this,  that  Sebastian  cannot  have  been  born  later  than  1472. 
This  and  the  fact  that  he  was  alive,  though  very  old,  in  1556  are  the 
only  dates  we  have  from  which  to  conjecture  the  date  of  his  birth. 

II.  The  number  of  voyages  made  from  Bristol  by  Cabot  between 
the  discovery  of  America  by  Columbus  and  the  end  of  the  century. 
This  is  an  intricate  question,  and  one  on  which  later  historians  have 
got  into  much  confusion. 

Two  voyages,  one  in  1497,  the  other  in  1498,  appear  to  me  to  rest 
on  perfectly  clear  evidence.  Pasqualigo's  letter  and  the  patent  of 
1498  clearly  prove  the  former,  and  the  Bristol  MS.  confirms  them. 
Stow  proves  the  latter.  Moreover,  the  extract  from  the  Privy  Purse 
Expenses  shows  that  some  voyage  of  discovery  was  made  in  1497. 
Is  it  likely  that  if  any  other  English  seaman  had  made  an  important 
discovery  we  should  hear  nothing  more  of  it  ?  So,  too,  the  following 
extracts  from  the  expenses  of  1498,  as  well  as  the  patent  of  that  year, 
plainly  connect  the  discovery  of  1497  with  a  subsequent  trading 
voyage : 

"To  Lanslot  Thirkell  of  London  upon  a  prest  for  his  ship  going 
towards  the  new  Island,  2/.  22d  of  March,  1498. 

"Delivered  to  Lanslot  Thirkell  going  towards  the  new  Isle,  a 
;prest  20/. 

"To  Thomas  Bradley  and  Lanslot  Thirkell  going  to  the  New  Isle 
30/.  April  1st,  1498." 

These  extracts  also  tally  with  Stow's  statement  that  the  voyage  of 
1498  was  made  to  an  island  which  Cabot  "knew  to  be  replenished 
with  rich  commodities." 

It  is  evident,  too,  that  the  voyage  described  by  Pasqualigo  was  sim  - 
ply  one  of  discovery,  to  be  followed  by  another  for  trading  purposes. 
Besides  Stow's  evidence  for  the  voyage  of  1498  we  have  a  confirma- 
tory statement  in  Bacon's  "  Life  of  Henry  VII."  He  repeats  Stow's 
statement,  identifying  the  voyage  of  1498  with  that  in  which  Cabot 
sought  for  a  northwest  passage  and  actually  reached  6j\°  north  lati- 
tude. Bacon's  statement,  it  is  true,  is  not  contemporary  evidence, 
and  was  probably  borrowed  from  Stow,  or  rather  from  Fabian.  Still, 
Bacon  is  hardly  likely  to  have  accepted  Stow's  statement  without 


APPENDIX  C.  4C5 

some  confirmatory  evidence.     I  hold  then  that  we  are  fully  justified 
on  the  evidence  in  assuming  two  voyages  as  described  in  the  text. 

We  now  come  to  a  more  difficult  question,  the  alleged  voyage  of 
1494,  resting  solely  on  the  evidence  of  the  Paris  map.  Messrs.  Bry- 
ant and  Gay  boldly  cut  this  Gordian  knot  by  supposing  IV.  to  be  a 
misprint  for  VII.,  and  I  am  strongly  inclined  to  agree  with  them. 
The  main  evidence  in  favor  of  that  view  is  the  improbability  that  this 
one  isolated  notice  would  be  the  only  remaining  evidence  of  so  im- 
portant a  voyage.  Would  no  English  chronicler  have  noticed  it,  and 
should  we  find  no  reference  to  it  in  the  Venetian  Archives  ?  Should 
we  have  such  definite  though  scanty  knowledge  of  Sebastian  Cabot's 
discovery  of  1497,  while  only  one  doubtful  record  remains  of  a  far 
more  remarkable  voyage  three  years  earlier  ?  Again  :  it  is  clear  that 
the  note  accompanying  the  Paris  map  and  that  accompanying  Clem- 
ent Adams's  map  cannot  both  stand.  If  one  is  right,  the  other  must 
be  wrong,  The  Paris  map  has  no  independent  evidence  in  its  favor. 
Clement  Adams's  statement  we  know  to  be  in  part  true.  Cabot  un- 
questionably made  a  voyage  in  1497,  though  he  may  not  have  dis- 
covered Newfoundland  on  St.  John's  day  in  that  year.  Of  course  it 
it  is  just  possible  that  Clement  Adams,  or  whoever  appended  the 
note  to  his  map,  and  also  the  Bristol  chronicler,  quoted  by  Mr.  Barrett, 
may  both  have  known  that.  Cabot  made  a  voyage  of  discovery  in  1497, 
and  that  they  may  have  confused  the  two  voyages  and  transferred  the 
day  of  discovery,  which  belonged  to  the  earlier  voyage,  to  the  later. 
But  if  we  must  deal  in  a  hypothesis,  that  put  forward  by  Messrs.  Bryant 
and  Gay  seems  to  me  to  be  simpler  and  more  probable. 

On  the  other  hand,  Mr.  Nicholls  has  brought  forward  one  strong 
point  in  favor  of  accepting  the  Paris  record.  He  points  out  that  the 
entry  in  the  Privy  Purse  Expenses  is  dated  August  10.  Is  it  likely, 
he  asks,  that  Cabot  could  have  discovered  land  on  the  24th  of  June, 
could  then  have  sailed  four  hundred  leagues  as  recorded  by  Pasqualigo, 
and  been  back  in  England  by  the  10th  of  August  ?  The  other  ar- 
guments urged  by  Mr.  Nicholls  have,  I  think,  far  less  weight.  He 
notices  that  Pasqualigo  describes  Cabot  as  skillful  in  discovering  new 
islands.  This  Mr.  Nicholls  says  implies  previous  success  in  that  line. 
To  my  mind  it  need  mean  no  more  than  that  Cabot  was  a  scientific 
navigator.  Pasqualigo  also  speaks  of  the  discovery  as  two  new 
islands,  which  Mr.  Nicholls  thinks  implies  that  Cabot  had  before  dis- 
covered some  other  islands.  Surely  it  is  more  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  "  new  "  simply  means  unknown  before.  If  it  must  refer  to  any 
other  recently-discovered  lands,  why  not  to  those  explored  by  Colum- 
bus ? 

Altogether,  I  think  the  voyage  of  1494  must  be  an  open  question, 
though  the  probabilities  are  against  it. 

III.  As  to  the  extent  of  Cabot's  discoveries,  Mr.  Biddle  appears  to 


406  APPENDIX  C. 

me  to  be  perfectly  correct  in  his  view,  that  they  reached  at  some 
time  or  other  to  67^-°  north  latitude.  That  statement  is  made  by 
Ramusius  on  the  authority  of  Cabot  himself,  it  is  confirmed  by  three 
well-informed  writers,  Bacon,  Gilbert,  and  Churchyard  (the  author  of 
"A  Praise  and  Report  of  Martin  Frobisher's  Voyage  to  Meta  In- 
cognita," London,  1578),  and  no  counter-theory  seems  to  rest  on  any- 
good  ground.  A  far  more  difficult  question,  and  one  that  in  my 
opinion  admits  of  no  final  solution,  is  to  say  in  which  of  his  voyages 
Cabot  accomplished  this.  It  is  evident  that  none  of  his  historians 
clearly  grasped  the  fact  of  his  having  made  two  voyages,  and  conse- 
quently it  is  impossible  to  say  how  far  their  accounts  apply  to  each 
respectively.  In  fact,  it  seems  to  me  pretty  clear  that  each  writer  as- 
sumed that  there  was  only  one  voyage,  and  attached  to  it  all  the 
incidents  which  he  had  heard  of  in  connection  with  a  voyage  of  Cabot 
to  the  northwest  seas.  Indeed,  it  does  not  seem  certain  that  the  voy- 
age of  1 517  has  not  been  confused  with  the  earlier  ones.  The  mutiny 
referred  to  by  Ramusius  might  very  well  be  identical  with  the  failure 
caused  by  the  "  faint  heart "  of  Sir  Thomas  Pert ;  and  if  this  be  so, 
it  may  possibly  have  been  in  that  voyage  that  Cabot  reached  67^°. 

IV.  The  parts  played  by  John  and  Sebastian  Cabot  respectively. 
On  this  part  a  good  deal  of  confusion  has  arisen,  chiefly  owing  to  the 
substitution  of  John  for  Sebastian  in  Hakluyt's  later  account.  Mr. 
Biddle  has,  I  think,  clearly  traced  the  process  of  this  change.  There 
can  be  little  doubt  that  he  is  right  in  supposing  that  between  his  first 
and  second  publication  Hakluyt  discovered  the  patent  of  1498,  and 
was  led  by  it  to  substitute  the  name  of  John  for  that  of  Sebastian. 
At  the  same  time  Mr.  Biddle  attacks  Hakluyt  with  an  amusing  degree 
of  anger  as  though  he  had  deliberately  falsified  evidence  in  order  to 
rob  Sebastian  of  his  deserved  glory.  We  must  remember  what  Hak- 
luyt's position  and  object  were.  He  was  not  an  antiquary  devoting 
studious  care  to  the  elucidation  of  minute  points.  His  object  was  not 
so  much  to  produce  a  work  of  detailed  exactness  as  to  stimulate  his 
countrymen  by  a  vivid  and  comprehensive  picture  of  those  great  dis- 
coveries which  were  transforming  the  face  of  the  world.  It  is  just 
possible  that  Hakluyt  had  some  valid  ground  for  inserting  John's 
name  where  his  original  authority,  Stow,  had  placed  Sebastian,  but  it 
was  far  more  probably,  as  Mr.  Biddle  supposes,  a  mistake.  The 
only  other  writer  who  specially  connects  John  Cabot  with  the  dis- 
coveries is  Pasqualigo.  He  may  possibly  have  dwelt  from  choice  on 
the  success  of  the  Venetian  John  rather  than  of  the  Englishman 
Sebastian,  but  it  is  more  likely  that  he  simply  took  him  as,  in  modern 
phrase,  the  head  of  the  firm.  In  all  probability  Fabian  and  the 
writers  of  the  next  generation  were  right  in  assigning  the  credit  of 
the  discovery  to  Sebastian.  But  even  if  John  took  part  in  the  voyage 
of  1497,  we  may  safely  assume,  from  the  consensus  of  all  authorita- 


APPENDIX  E.  4o7 

tive  writers  in  the  next  generation,  that  the  son  held  a  conspicuous 
place  and  was  at  the  very  least  an  able  assistant,  not,  as  some  later 
writers  have  thought,  a  mere  lad  suffered  to  accompany  the  expedi- 
tion. 


APPENDIX  D. 
The  Contractation  House  at  Seville,  p.  33. 

Hakluyt,  in  his  fourth  volume,  gives  a  minute  account  of  the  Con- 
tractation House,  taken  in  part  from  the  statement  of  a  Spanish  pris- 
oner. As  I  have  said  in  the  text,  the  functions  of  this  body  were 
twofold.  It  instructed,  examined,  and  commissioned  pilots,  and  it 
inspected  ships.  Any  seaman  who  wished  to  become  a  pilot  went 
in  the  first  instance  to  the  master-pilot  of  the  kingdom,  who,  with 
the  assistance  of  other  licensed  pilots,  put  him  through  a  preliminary 
examination.  If  this  was  satisfactory,  and  if  the  candidate  was  a 
born  Spaniard,  he  was  allowed  to  attend  a  course  of  lectures  on  navi- 
gation. The  class  consisted  of  about  fourteen,  and  studied  for  four 
hours  a  day,  partly  listening,  partly  discussing.  After  a  two  months' 
course  the  candidate  was  examined  by  a  board  of  twenty-five  pilots, 
who  tested  his  skill  in  navigation  and  his  special  knowledge  of  some 
one  portion  of  the  American  coast.  The  examination  in  the  practical 
details  of  seamanship  was  a  severe  one.  If  the  candidate  passed  he 
obtained  a  pilot's  license. 

The  inspection  of  vessels  was  conducted  by  four  visitors,  appointed 
by  the  king,  and  the  system  of  inspection  was  prescribed  by  the  rules 
of  the  Contractation  House.  No  vessel  was  allowed  to  sail  indepen- 
dently, but  a  fleet  went  out  together  as  an  organized  body,  headed  by 
an  admiral.  The  lading,  the  provisions,  the  ordnance,  and  all  the 
ship's  furniture  were  minutely  inspected,  and  the  names  of  the  crew 
all  registered.  Furthermore,  a  notary  accompanied  every  ship  to 
keep  a  minute  account  of  all  merchandise  put  on  board.  Such  a 
method  might,  like  all  highly-organized  systems,  do  something  to 
weaken  independence,  energy,  and  self-reliance,  but  the  evils  which 
English  navigation  suffered  from  the  total  absence  of  any  such  control 
are  written  on  every  page  of  Hakluyt's  writings. 


APPENDIX    E. 

Captain  John  Smith,  p.  10 1. 

Public  opinion  as  to  the  literary  and  personal  character  of  Smith 
has  undergone  more  than  one  change.      In  his  own   lifetime  there 


4o8  APPENDIX  E. 

seems  to  have  been  a  natural  tendency  to  doubt  whether  such  as- 
tounding episodes  of  active  heroism  and  of  endurance,  and  such  a 
rapid  series  of  romantic  adventures  could  be  compressed  into  the  ca- 
reer of  one  man  before  he  had  reached  middle  life.  But  since  the 
origin  of  anything  like  a  school  of  indigenous  literature  in  America 
down  to  recent  times,  Smith  seems  to  have  been  taken  at  his  own  es- 
timate. This  was  partly  due,  no  doubt,  to  the  firm  belief  in  him  en- 
tertained by  Stith,  and  partly  to  reluctance  to  strip  a  somewhat  dry  and 
prosiac  portion  of  history  of  the  chief  among  its  few  romantic  episodes. 
In  our  own  day,  however,  more  than  one  writer  has  exposed  Smith's 
story  to  the  full  light  of  historical  criticism,  much  to  the  detriment  of 
its  credibility  if  not  to  that  of  the  hero's  character.  The  writers  who 
have  dealt  most  severely  with  Smith  are,  Mr.  Neill,  in  his  "  History 
of  English  Colonization,"  and  the  author  of  an  article  (commonly  as- 
cribed, I  believe,  to  Mr.  Charles  Adams)  in  the  "  North  American 
Review"  for  January,  1867.  On  the  other  hand,  the  late  Mr.  Pal- 
frey, in  the  introductory  portion  of  his  "  History  of  New  England," 
and  Mr.  Coit  Tyler,  in  his  "  History  of  American  Literature,"  take  a 
more  lenient  view.  Each  of  these  writers,  while  admitting  what, 
indeed,  can  hardly  be  questioned,  the  untruth  and  extravagance  of 
many  portions  of  Smith's  story,  have  at  the  same  time  taken  on  the 
whole  a  favorable  view  of  the  writer's  character.  I  may  add  that  I 
had  completed  the  greater  part  of  this  volume  before  Mr.  Tyler's 
work  appeared,  and  I  was  delighted  to  find  my  estimate  of  Smith's 
character  confirmed  by  so  judicious  and  able  a  writer. 

Before  discussing  the  truth  of  Smith's  adventures  as  told  by  him- 
self we  must  clearly  distinguish  between  the  two  branches  of  the  in- 
quiry:  1.  The  credibility  of  certain  portions  of  Smith's  story.  2. 
The  personal  character  of  Smith  himself.  As  to  the  first,  I  hardly 
imagine  that  any  one  will  now  endeavor  to  uphold  the  truth  of  the 
most  striking  and  best  remembered  episode  in  Smith's  own  story,  his 
captivity  among  the  Indians  and  his  rescue  by  Pocahontas.  This 
matter  has  already  been  touched  on  in  my  narrative.  Perhaps  the 
case  will  be  best  understood  if  we  place  before  us  the  three  narra- 
tives bearing  Smith's  name.  These  are  the  "  True  Description," 
written  in  1608;  the  "Map  of  Virginia,"  written  in  1612,  and  the 
"  History,"  written  in  1624.  For  convenience  I  will  call  them  A,  B, 
C  in  order  of  time.  A.  is  the  only  one  of  the  three  for  which  Smith 
is  exclusively  responsible.  B.  must  be  looked  on  as  two  distinct 
works:  1.  A  description  of  the  country  and  people  by  Smith.  2.  A 
series  of  narratives  in  the  nature  of  depositions,  written  by  colonists 
and  other  persons  interested  in  Virginia,  and  tagged  together  with- 
out any  care  to  harmonize  them  into  a  connected  whole.  In  many 
places  B.  is  a  mere  epitome  of  A.  C,  like  B.,  consists  partly  of 
Smith's  own  statements,  partly  of  depositions. 


APPENDIX  E.  409 

The  two  short  expeditions  made  by  Smith  before  that  in  which  he 
was  taken  prisoner  are  told  in  all  three  without  any  substantial  differ- 
ence. The  divergency  begins  when  we  come  to  the  account  of  Smith's 
captivity.  The  account  in  A.  is  that  given  in  my  text.  That  in  B.  is  an 
abridgment  of  A.  This  is  signed  by  Thomas  Studley.  The  ac- 
count in  C.  is  an  independent  story  altogether,  introducing  for  the 
first  time  the  romantic  episodes  mentioned  in  p.  120.  This  account 
is  signed  by  Thomas  Studley,  Robert  Fenton,  Edward  Harrington, 
and  John  Smith. 

The  case  then  is  simply  this.  Smith  wrote  two  accounts  of  his 
captivity,  the  second  a  full  one.  In  neither  is  a  word  said  of  his 
danger.  In  a  third  account  published  twelve  years  later,  he  intro- 
duces the  romantic  episode  of  his  threatened  execution  and  his  rescue 
by  Pocahontas.  We  cannot  suppose  that  in  the  earlier  accounts,  either 
through  haste  or  for  brevity's  sake,  he  suppressed  these  details.  The 
whole  account  of  his  reception  and  treatment  by  Powhatan  is  incon- 
sistent with  the  idea  of  his  having  ever  been  in  any  danger.  Of 
course  it  is  not  absolutely  impossible  that  the  later  and  more 
romantic  story  may  be  the  true  one,  but  most  readers  will  agree  with 
me  that  such  a  hypothesis  is  most  improbable.  One  of  the  two 
stories,  either  the  earlier  one  or  the  later,  is  untrue.  It  is  difficult  to 
see  any  motive  in  the  first  instance  either  for  the  suppression  of  truth 
or  the  invention  of  falsehood.  On  the  other  hand,  the  motives  for 
the  later  invention  are  obvious.  Pocahontas  had  then  become  an 
accepted  heroine  in  American  history,  the  one  personage  in  the  annals 
of  the  Virginian  colony  to  whom  something  of  romance  attached, 
and  she  served  as  a  sort  of  ready-made  centre  around  whom  any 
picturesque  legends  might  group  themselves.  It  is  clear,  too,  that 
Smith  delighted  in  depicting  himself,  not,  indeed,  wholly  without 
truth,  as  a  modern  knight-errant,  the  lover  of  high-born  ladies,  alter- 
nately the  conqueror  and  the  captive  of  giants  and  oppressors.  As 
between  the  stories  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  the  earlier  is  the  plain 
unsophisticated  statement  of  truth,  and  the  latter  a  romance.  It 
must  be  noticed,  too,  that  the  incident  of  Smith's  execution,  although 
the  most  conspicuous  instance  of  discrepancy  between  his  earlier  and 
later  stories,  is  not  the  only  one,  and  that  in  every  case  the  later  ver- 
sion is  the  more  romantic. 

Thus  the  expedition  described  in  p.  122  is  told  originally  in  the 
narrative  of  1612,  and  signed  by  Nathaniel  Powell  and  Annas  Tod- 
kill.  In  the  later  work  it  appears,  with  various  romantic  episodes 
added,  and  signed  by  the  same  names,  and  in  addition,  by  that  of 
Anthony  Bagnell.  This  tendency  to  amplify  and  embellish  is 
specially  noteworthy  in  all  incidents  where  Pocahontas  figures.  Thus 
in  describing  a  trading  visit  to  Powhatan,  B.  tells  us  simply  that  the 
English  became  suspicious  and  made  off  by  night.     According  to  C. 


4io 


APPENDIX  E 


they  were  warned  by  Pocahontas  that  some  injury  was  intended.  B., 
in  describing  a  sort  of  ceremonial  visit  paid  to  Smith  by  a  number  of 
Indian  women,  says  nothing  of  Pocahontas.  C.  assigns  her  the  princi- 
pal place. 

There  is  also  a  passage  in  B.  which  I  think  has  an  important  bear- 
ing on  the  question.  Smith  there  says :  "  Some  prophetical  spirit 
calculated  he  had  the  savages  in  such  subjection  he  could  have  made 
himself  a  king  by  marrying  Pocahontas,  Powhatan's  daughter.  It  is 
true  that  she  was  the  very  nonpareil  of  his  kingdom.  Very  often 
she  came  to  our  fort  with  what  she  could  get  for  Captain  Smith  that 
ever  loved  and  used  all  the  country  well,  but  her  especially  he  ever 
much  respected,  and  she  so  well  requited  that,  that  when  her  father 
intended  to  have  imprisoned  him,  she  by  stealth  in  the  dark  night, 
came  through  the  wild  woods  and  told  him  of  it."  Is  it  likely  that,  if 
the  story  of  Smith's  rescue  were  true,  it  should  not  have  appeared 
here  in  what  may  be  regarded  as  Smith's  formal  panegyric  on  the 
heroine  of  it  ? 

After  this  it  may  seem  almost  a  paradox  to  attempt  to  defend  the 
personal  character  of  Smith.  Nevertheless,  I  believe  that  if  we  con- 
sider  the  circumstances  of  the  case  and  the  canons  of  the  age  as  to 
historical  truth,  we  shall  find  it  possible  to  reject  Smith's  story  with- 
out setting  down  its  hero  and  author  as  an  impostor.  In  the  first 
place,  some  weight  must  be  attached  to  Mr.  Palfrey's  plea  that 
Smith  was  not  wholly,  perhaps  not  mainly,  responsible  for  the  work 
to  which  his  name  is  appended.  To  some  extent  this  is  apparent  on 
the  face  of  the  work.  It  may  well  be,  as  Mr.  Palfrey  thinks,  that 
Smith's  adventures  fell  into  the  hands  of  hack  writers  who  embel- 
lished them  in  accordance  with  the  taste  of  the  age.  If  this  be  so, 
the  earlier  and  simpler  story  is  Smith's  own  version,  the  later  an  in- 
vention to  which  he  merely  lent  his  name.  Yet  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  Smith  made  himself  responsible  for  the  story  of  his  rescue 
by  accepting  it  in  a  letter  addressed  by  him  to  Queen  Anne,  the  sub- 
stance of  which  appears  in  the  "History,"  p.  121.  But  even  if  we 
reject  Mr.  Palfrey's  explanation,  it  would  be  unfair  to  judge  the  cul- 
pability of  Smith's  inventions  by  the  standard  of  a  later  age.  No 
one  thinks  Herodotus  a  liar  because  he  relates  in  minute  detail  con- 
versations which  no  man  could  have  remembered.  The  latter  half  of 
the  sixteenth  century,  and  in  a  less  degree  the  age  that  followed,  was 
a  time  of  intoxication  and  bewilderment.  America  and  all  that  re- 
lated to  it  were  seen  through  an  atmosphere  of  romance  and  enchant- 
ment. A  man  like  Smith  may  well  have  approached  the  history  of 
Virginia  not  in 'the  sober  attitude  of  an  annalist,  but  in  the  frame  of 
mind  in  which  Shakespeare  dealt  with  the  chronicles  of  England,  in 
which  Scott  embellished  the  exploits  and  glorified  the  heroes  of  the 
Forty-five.     The  other  independent  evidence  of  Smith's  character  has 


APPENDIX  E.  4I1 

been  well  discussed  by  Mr.  Palfrey.  He  laboriously  tested  Smith's 
own  account  of  his  adventures  in  eastern  Europe  by  compari- 
son with  independent  authorities,  and  on  the  whole  with  a  favorable 
result.  He  also  pointed  out  that  ten  years  later  Smith  stood  high  in 
the  favor  of  Gorges  and  others  connected  with  the  colonization  of 
New  England.  No  impostor  or  mere  adventurer,  however  plausible, 
could  have  held  the  position  that  Smith  did  and  retained  the  good 
opinion  of  competent  judges. 

One  odd,  though  natural,  mistake  occurs  in  Mr.  Palfrey's  account 
of  Smith.  He  says  that  Smith  found  his  way  to  Tattersall's,  in  Lon- 
don, drawn  thither  probably  by  his  love  of  horses.  The  "  Tatter- 
shall  "  of  Smith's  story  was  a  place  in  Lincolnshire,  the  country-seat 
of  the  Earl  of  Lincoln.  The  better  known  "  Tattersall's  "  did  not 
come  into  being  till  Smith  had  been  in  his  grave  for  more  than  a. 
century. 


INDEX 


ABB. 

ABBOTT,  Jeffreys,  a  rebel  in  Vir- 
ginia, 141. 
Adams,  Clement,  his  writings,  41. 
African  Company,  the  Royal,  incorpo- 
ration of,  386. 
Albemarle,  Duke  of,  a  Proprietor  of 
Carolina,  329. 

—  River,  in  North  Carolina,  63,  331. 

—  Point,  in  South  Carolina,  355. 
Alexander,    Sir    William,     supports 

Clayborne,  295. 

Alvarado,  Luys  Moseoso  de,  a  Span- 
ish explorer,  81. 

America,  general  character  of  the 
continent,  6. 

Americans,  see  Indians. 

Amidas  and  Barlow,  voyage  of,  in 
1584,  56. 

Andros,  Sir  Edmund,  Governor  of 
Virginia,  272. 

Annapolis  constituted  a  city,  325. 

Ann  Arundel,  Puritan  settlement  at, 
304,  315,  320. 

Apomatock  Indians,  142. 

Archdale,  John,  Governor  of  Caro- 
olina,  364. 

Archer,  a  councilor  in  Virginia,  118, 
121. 

Argall,  Samuel,  134;  his  attack  on 
the  French  colonies,  148 ;  appoint- 
ed Deputy  Governor  of  Virginia, 
155;  his  misconduct  and  deposi- 
tion, 157. 

Arlington,  Lord,  grant  of  land  to,  in 
Virginia,  2^9. 

Ashley,  see  Shaftesbury. 

Assembly,  the  first,  held  in  Virginia, 
158;  formation  of,  in  Maryland, 
286  et  seq. 

Atlantic,  the  coast  contrasted  with 
the  Pacific,  6. 

Ayllon,  Lucas  de,  kidnaps  Indians, 
78. 


B 


BRI. 

ACON,  Nathaniel,  245;   his  re- 
forms, 247;   his  rebellion,  248, 
341 ;  his  schemerof  separation,  250 ; 
his  death,  2^3. 
"Baconists"  in  Maryland,  317,  342. 
Baltimore,  see  Calvert 
Barbadoes  sends  settlers  to  Carolina, 

35i>  357- 

Bargrave,  Captain,  172. 

Barlow  and  Amidas,  voyage  of,  in 
1584,  56. 

Bennet,  Governor  of  Virginia,  223. 

Berkeley,  Sir  William,  Governor  of 
Virginia,  207 ;  surrenders  to  the 
Parliamentary  Commissioners,  222 ; 
reappointed  Governor  of  Virginia, 
228;  his  rapacity,  236 ;  war  against 
Bacon,  251 ;  deposition  and  death, 
257 ;  a  Proprietor  of  Carolina,  329 ; 
his  policy  there,  332. 

Bermudas,  discovery  of,  130. 

Beverley,  Robert,  254 ;  his  attempt  at 
rebellion,  261. 

—  the  younger,  the  historian,  char- 
acter of  his  work,  230,  note. 

Bieiicourt,  148,  150. 

Birkenhead,  his  plot  in  Virginia,  233. 

Blair,  James,  269 ;  founds  the  College 
of  William  and  Mary,  272;  Presi- 
dent of  it,  273. 

Blake,  Governor  of  Carolina,  365. 

Blakiston,  temporary  Governor  of 
Maryland,  324. 

Boon,  agent  for  the  South  Carolina 
Nonconformists  in  England,  371. 

Bray,  Thomas,  326 ;  procures  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  Church  in  Mary- 
land, 326. 

Brazil,  voyages  to,  34;  Huguenot 
colony  in,  89. 

Brewster,  Captain  Edward,  157. 

Bristol,  connection  of,  with  American 
discovery,  22;  kidnapping  preva- 
lent in,  385. 

413 


414 


■■„ 


INDEX. 


BUT. 

Butler,  Captain  Nathaniel,  171. 
Burrough,  Stephen,  38. 
Byrd,  Colonel  William,  of  Virginia, 
348. 

CABOT,  John,  23. 
—  Sebastian,  23,  399-406;  his 
first  voyage,  24;  second  voyage, 
25;  becomes  Grand  Pilot,  37;  his 
death,  38. 
Calvert,  Sir  George,  first  Lord  Balti- 
more, attempts  to  settle  in  New- 
foundland, 277;  emigrates  to  Vir- 
ginia, 195,  279;  his  death,  281. 

—  Cecilius,  second  Lord  Baltimore, 
his  character  and  policy,  281,  312; 
his  death,  315. 

—  Charles,  third  Lord  Baltimore,  suc- 
ceeds to  the  Proprietorship,  315 ; 
implicated  in  the  murder  of  Rousby, 
318;  deprived  of  his  Proprietor- 
ship, 321. 

—  Leonard,  Governor  of  Maryland, 
283 ;  his  death,  303. 

—  Philip,  Governor  of  Maryland,  310, 

3X3- 

Canada,  French  settlements  in,  85  et 
seq.,  145  et  seq. 

Cape  Fear,  settlement  at,  from  New- 
England,    331 ;    from    Barbadoes, 

351- 

Cardross,    Lord,    his    settlement    at 

Port  Royal,  358. 
Carlile,  his  scheme  for  colonization, 

54- 
Carolina,  grant  of,  in  1663,  329 ;  pre- 
vious grant  to  Sir  Robert  Heath, 
330 ;  origin  of  name,  ib. ;  different 
settlements  in,  331 ;  "Fundamental 
Constitutions,"  334-38;  definitely 
divided  into  North  and  South,  343. 

—  North,  early  constitutional  history 
of,  332 ;  rebellion  of  1678,  340 ;  re- 
bellion of  1 71 1,  343;  dealings  with 
Indians,  345 ;  general  condition, 
348 ;  war  with  Tuscaroras,  347 ; 
becomes  a  crown  colony,  350. 

—  South,  first  settlement  of,  352 ; 
various  immigrations  into,  3575 
slavery  in,  359,  385,  389,  391 ;  dis- 
putes between  settiers  and  Propri- 
etors, 366 ;  social  and  industrial 
condition,  372,  394;  war  with  Ya- 
massees,  373;  overthrow  of  Propri- 
etary Government,  379. 

Carteret,  Palatine  of  Carolina,  377. 

Cartier,  Jacques,  first  voyage  of,  in 
1534,  84;  second  voyage  in  1535, 
85  ;  third  voyag£  in  1540,  87. 


CUL. 

Cary  heads  a  rebellion  in  North  Car- 
olina, 344. 

Cavendish,  Lord,  a  leading  member 
of  the  Virginia  Company,  1 77. 

Champlain,  Samuel,  146. 

Chancellor,  Richard,  his  voyage,  38. 

Charles  I.,  his  colonial  policy,  188. 

Charles  II.,  the  colonies  under,  230, 
329 ;  his  grants  of  land  in  Virginia, 
238,    239;    his  grant   of  Carolina, 

329. 

Charlestown,  capital  of  South  Caro- 
lina, 355;  moved  to  Oyster  Point, 
356;  its  importance,  356,  395; 
siege  of,  368. 

Cheeseman,  Colonel,  one  of  Bacon's 
followers,  254. 

Chichely,  Sir  Henry,  258. 

Chickahominy  Indians,  144,  154. 

Chowanock  Indians,  63. 
"Glay,.  Henry,  284.  i> 

Clayborne,  William,  89;  intrigues 
against  Maryland,  292 ;  his  scheme 
of  fur  trade,  295. 

Coligny,  Admiral,  attempts  to  found 
a  settlement  in  South  America,  88. 

College  of  William  and  Mary,  estab-% 
lishment  of,  270. 

Colleton,  Governor  of  South  Caro- 
lina, 362. 

Columbus,  Bartholomew,  visits  the 
English  Court,  20. 

Commonwealth,  colonial  policy  of, 
212. 

Conformity  Bill  in  South  Carolina,  3  71. 

Constitutions,  Fundamental,  see  Car- 
olina. 

Contractation  House  at  Seville,  func- 
tions of,  33,  407. 

Coode,  conduct  of,  in  Maryland,  319. 

Copland,  Patrick,  a  missionary,  163 ; 
sermon  by,  167. 

Copley,  Governor  of  Maryland,  323. 

Corn,  exportation  of,  from  Virginia, 
205  ;  from  Maryland,  300. 

Cornwallis,  a  councilor  in  Maryland, 
286,  289,  303. 

Crashaw,  William,  his  sermon  on 
Virginia,  133. 

Craven,  Lord,  Palatine  of  South  Car- 
olina, 372. 

—  Charles,  Governor  of  North  Car- 
olina, 372. 

Culppeper,  Thomas,  Lord,  grant  of 
land  to,  in  Virginia,  239  ;  appoint- 
ed Governor  of  Virginia,  259 ;  de- 
prived of  his  office,  263. 

—  John,  heads  a  rebellion  in  North 
Carolina,  341. 


INDEX. 


415 


DALE,  Sir  Thomas,  High  Marshal 
of  Virginia,  137 ;  his  govern- 
ment, 138;  death,  152. 

Delaware,  Lord,  123;  appointed  Gov- 
ernor of  Virginia,  129;  arrives  in 
Virginia,  133;  death,  155. 

Doeg  Indians,  243. 

Donnacona,  Indian  chief,  85. 

Drake,  Sir  Francis,  helps  the  settlers 
in  Virginia,  67. 

Drummond,  William,  joins  Bacon's 
rebellion,  252 ;  his  execution,  254 ; 
Governor  of  North  Carolina,  333. 

Durant,  George,  341. 

Dutch  attack  on  Virginia,  234. 


E^AST  India  Company,    formation 
I  of,  108.  • 
Eastchurch,  Governor  of  North  Car- 
olina, 340. 
Eden,  Richard,  39  ;  his  writings,  41. 
Edenton,  capital  of  North  Carolina, 

350. 
Edisto,  in    South  Carolina,  attacked 
and  plundered   by  the    Spaniards, 

358. 
Effingham,  see  Howard. 
Eliot,  Hugh,  of  Bristol,  26,  27. 
Elizabeth,  Queen,  supports  Stukeley, 

43;  names  Virginia,  57;  her  death, 

107. 
Evelyn,  Captain,  Governor  of  the  Isle 

of  Kent,  294. 
Exclusion    Bill,    disputes    about,    in 

Maryland,  317. 


FELONS,    transportation    of,    see 
Slavery. 

Fendall,  his  intrigues  in  Maryland, 
310  ;  his  trial  and  sentence,  313. 

Ferrar,  John,  Deputy  Treasurer  to 
the  Virginia  Company,  158;  ar- 
rested, 177. 

—  Nicholas,  163,  note,  173;  elected 
Treasurer  of  the  Virginia  Company. 
1 74 ;  attempts  of  the  Court  to  se- 
duce, 177. 

-Five  Nations,  see  Iroquois. 
'Florida,  Stukeley's  scheme  for  a  col- 
ony in,  42 ;  French  colony  in,  90 ; 
destroyed  by  the  Spanish,  96 ;  in- 
invasion  of,  by  the  English,  366; 
second  invasion,  368. 

France,  position  of,  in  colonization, 
82. 

French,  see  Canada  and  Huguenots. 

Frobisher,  Martin,  45. 


HUG. 

GASCOIGNE,    George,   publishes 
Gilbert's  "Discourse,"  46. 
Gates,  Sir  Thomas,  member  of  the 

Virginia  Company,  109;  Governor 

of  Virginia,  141. 
Gerrard,    Sir    Thomas,    trades    with 

Guinea,    37;     purchases    Gilbert's 

patent,  48. 
Gilbert,     Sir     Humphrey,    43;     his 

scheme  for  a  Northwest  Passage, 

44;  his    first   voyage,  47;    second 

voyage,  48 ;  his  return  and  death, 

5i- 
Gondomar,  the  Spanish  ambassador, 

intrigues  against  Virginia,  165,  170. 
Gorges,  Sir  Fernando,  no. 
Gosnold,  Bartholomew,  discovers  the 

passage  to  America  by  the  Azores, 

105  ;  his  death,  119. 
Gourgues,    Dominic  de,    attacks   the 

Spanish  settlers  in  Florida,  98. 
Grafenried,  Christopher  de,  founds  a 

settlement   of  Germans   in   North 

Carolina,  346. 
Granganimeo,  57. 

Grenville,  Sir  Richard,  59;    his  sec- 
ond voyage  to  Virginia,  69. 
Gresham,    Sir   Thomas,    encourages 

navigation,  33. 
Guinea,  voyages  to,  36. 

HAKLUYT,  Richard,  his  writings, 
106,    397 ;     furthers    American 
discovery,   107;  a  leading  member 
of  the  Virginia  Company,  109. 
Hamor,  Ralph,  his  visit  to  Powhatan, 

145- 

Harte,  Governor  of  Maryland,  326. 

Harvey,  Governor  of  Virginia,  191  ; 
disputes  with  the  settlers,  194;  in- 
surrection against,  197;  arrested 
and  sent  to  England,  197. 

Hawkins,  Sir  John,  exports  negroes 
from  Guinea,  37 ;  helps  the  French 
settlers  in  Florida,  93. 

—  William,  his  voyages  to  Brazil,  34. 
Heath,    Sir   Robert,    his   patent   for 

Carolina,  330. 
Henry  VII.,  patents  granted  by,  26. 

—  VIII. ,  encourages  navigation,  32. 
Heriot,  Thomas,  62. 

Hill,  Colonel,  254. 

Hochelaga,  Indian  city  of,  85. 

Holt,  Chief  Justice,  his  opinion  on 
the  case  of  Maryland,  321. 

Hore's  voyage  in  1536,  31. 

Howard  of  Effingham,  Lord,  Gov- 
ernor of  Virginia,  263. 

Huguenot  settlers  in  South  America, 


t/. 


4i6 


INDEX. 


HYD. 

88;  in  Florida,  89;  in  South  Car- 
olina, 357,  362. 
Hyde,   Governor  of  North  Carolina, 
344- 

"TNDIANS,"  origin  of  name,  9, 
1  397;  habits  and  character,  1 1 
et  seq. ;  influence  on  the  settlers, 
16 ;  first  meeting  with  the  English, 
61;  hostilities  with,  70;  Spanish 
attempts  to  enslave,  76;  attempts 
at  conversion  in  Virginia,  163 ;  wars 
with  in  Virginia,  167,  209,  242; 
legislation  on  behalf  of,  in  Virginia, 
241 ;  friendship  with  the  settlers  in 
Maryland,  301 ;  occasional  hostili- 
ty, 301 ;  war  with,  in  North  Caro- 
lina, 345 ;  attempts  to  enslave  in 
South  Carolina,  359;  war  with,  in 
South  Carolina,  373;  succession 
among,  398. 

Ingle,  Richard,  his  attack  on  Mary- 
land, 302. 

Iron,  attempts  to  work,  in  Virginia, 
162,  163,  193. 

Iroquois,  or  Five  Nations,  12,  13 ; 
joined  by  the  Tuscaroras,  348. 

JAMES  I.,  his  colonial  policy,  in  ; 
dealings  with  the  Virginia  Com- 
pany, 165,  170,  179,  181,  188. 

Jamestown,  settlement  at,  116;  acci- 
dentally burned,  121 ;  burned  by 
Bacon,  252. 

Japazs  :s,  an  Indian  chief,  betrays 
Poca*    >ntas  to  Argall,  143. 

Jefferson,  Thomas,  his  view  of  Vir- 
ginia life,  392. 

Jeffreys,  Herbert,  commissioner  in 
Virginia,  255  ;  his  death,  258. 

Jeoffry,  Jeoffry,  agent  for  Virginia  in 
England,  272. 

Jesuits,  their  settlement  in  Canada, 
147;  their  influence  in  Maryland, 
316. 

Johnson,  Sir  Nathaniel,  Governor  of 
South  Carolina,  368. 

—  the  younger,  Governor  of  South 
Carolina,  376,  377. 

—  Alderman,  a  leading  member  of 
the   Virginia   Company,   158,   165, 

KEMP,  Richard    Secretary  to  the 
Council  in  Virginia,  202,  207. 
Kendal,  a  mutineer  in  Virginia,  119. 
Kennebec  River,  the  exploration  of, 
108. 


Kent,  Isle  of,   disputes   about,    196, 

284,  291,  294. 
Kussoes,    an   Indian   tribe  in   South 

Carolina,  360. 

LABADISTS,  in  Maryland,  315. 
Land  tenure,  system  of,  in  Vir- 
ginia, 187 ;  in  Maryland,  285  ;    in 
Carolina,  333,  335. 

Lane,  Ralph,  his  career,  59 ;  his  pro- 
ceedings in  Virginia,  60. 

Laudonniere,  Rene,  his  colony  in 
Florida,  91. 

Lawrence,  Sir  Thomas,  a  councilor 
in  Maryland,  324. 

Lawson,  John,  murdered  by  Indians, 
346. 

Leon,  Juan  Ponce  de,  a  Spanish  ex- 
plorer, 77. 

Lery,  Baron  of,  his  colony,  84. 

Locke,  his   legislation   for   Carolina, 

335- 

Lok,  Michael,  supports  Frobisher,  46. 

Ludwell,  Philip,  Secretary  to  the 
Governor  and  Council  in  Virginia, 
237,  238;  sent  as  a  commissioner 
to  England,  240;  opposes  Lord 
Howard,  264;  becomes  Governor 
of  Carolina,  363. 

MACE,  Samuel,  his  voyage,  104. 
Mandans,  an  Indian  tribe,  pe- 
culiarities of,  13. 
Mangoaks,  an  Indian  tribe,  64. 
Manteo,  an  Indian,  59 ;  baptism  of, 

71. 

Martin,  Richard,  acts  as  the  advocate 
of  the  Virginia  Company  before 
Parliament,  150. 

—  a  Virginian  settler,  159. 

Maryland,  character  of  its  history, 
2  75  >  grant  of,  280;  charter,  281; 
opposed  by  the  Virginians,  195, 
282,  292 ;  first  settlement,  283 ; 
constitutional  development,  2S6  et 
seq.  ;  industrial  and  economical 
condition,  284,  299,315;  dealings 
with  Indians,  301 ;  civil  war,  302 ; 
establishment  of  Parliamentary  au- 
thority, 305 ;  further  hostilities, 
309  ;  restoration  of  the  Proprietor, 
312;  FendalPs  intrigues,  ib.;  Jes- 
uits in,  315;  the  Revolution,  319; 
deprivation  of  Baltimore,  321 ;  gov- 
ernorship of  Nicholson,  324  ;  es- 
tablishment of  Anglicanism,  326  ; 
restoration  of  the  Proprietorship, 
327. 


INDEX. 


417 


Massacre  by  Indians,  first,  in  Virgin- 
ia, 167  et  seq. ;  second,  209;  in 
South  Carolina,  374. 

Matthews,  Samuel,  a  leading  Virgin- 
ian, 189,  197,  198,  201. 

Menatonon,  an  Indian  chief,  64. 

Menendez,  Pedro  de,  his  expedition 
against  the  French  in  Florida,  95 
et  seq. 

Merchant  Adventurers  Company,  38 ; 
negotiations  with  Gilbert,  44. 

Middlesex,  Lord  Keeper,  intrigues 
against  the  Virginia  Company,  1 74. 

Miller,  collector   in  North  Carolina, 

341. 

Mitchell,  Lewis,  346. 

Moore  John,  Governor  of  South  Car- 
olina, 366. 

—  James,  347,  368,  379. 
Moratoc  River,  exploration  of,  64. 
Moraughtacund      Indians,      Smith's 

dealings  with,  123. 
Moryson,  agent  for  Virginia  in  Eng- 
land, 240;    sent  out  as  a  commis- 
sioner, 255. 

NANTICOCK  Indians,  hostilities 
with  Maryland,  306. 
Narvaez,  Pamphilo  de,  a  Spanish  ex- 
plorer, 78. 
Navigation,  before  the  fifteenth  cent- 
ury, 18;  condition  of,  in  England, 
20 ;  its  progress,  32  et  seq.  ;  rapid 
development  in  the  reign  of  Eliza- 
beth, 41 ;  literature  of,  ib. 

—  Act,  passed  by  the  Long  Parlia- 
ment, 212,  224;  re-enacted  after 
the  Restoration,  233. 

Necottowance,  an  Indian  chief,  sub- 
mits to  the  English,  210. 

Negroes,  first  introduction  of,  385 ; 
increase  of,  ib. ;  attempts  to  check 
their  importation,  388  ;  special  leg- 
islation for,  389;  difficulties  as  to 
their  baptism,  391. 

Nemattananow,  an  Indian,  murders 
an  English  settler,  and  is  put  to 
death,  168. 

Newfoundland,  discovered  by  Cabot, 
24 ;  importance  of  the  fisheries,  34 ; 
Gilbert  touches  at,  51 ;  granted  to 
Lord  Baltimore,  277. 

Newport,  Christopher,  112;  his  ex- 
plorations in  Virginia,  1 17;  his 
second  voyage  to  Virginia,  121. 

Nicholson,  Francis,  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor of  Virginia,  266;  his  com- 
prehensive views  on  colonial  affairs, 
267;  Governor  of  Maryland,  324; 


attacks   on   his    private   character, 

325 ;    charges   of  Jacobitism,  ib. ; 

Governor  of  South  Carolina,  379. 
Nonconformists,  in  Virginia,  215  ;  in 

Newfoundland,  278  ;  in  Maryland, 

3°4,  li$,  325J  in  South  Carolina, 

370. 
Northeast   Passage,    Cabot's  project 

for,  37. 
Northwest  Passage,  Gilbert's  project 

for,  47. 
"Nova  Britannia,"   a  pamphlet  on 

Virginia,  126. 

OKISKO,  an  Indian  chief,  submits 
to  the  English,  66. 

Opechancanough,  brother  of  Powhat- 
an, unfriendly  to  the  English,  120; 
instigates  the  first  massacre,  168; 
and  the  second,  209;  his  death, 
210. 

Opitchapan,  brother  of  Powhatan, 
168. 

Oyster  Point,  see  Charlestown. 

PACIFIC,    the    coast    contrasted 
with  the  Atlantic,  6. 
Palatines,    settlement   of,    in    North 

Carolina,  346. 
Peckham,  Sir  George,  purchases  Gil- 
bert's patent,  48 ;  his  pamphlet  on 
colonization,  52.    , 
Pembroke,  Earl  of,  trades  to  Guinea, 

37- 
Percival,    agent   for    Shaftesbury   in 

South  Carolina,  361. 
Percy,  a  leading  settler  in  Virginia, 

134- 

Pert,  Sir  Thomas,  29. 

Pocahontas,  daughter  of  Powhatan, 
her  alleged  rescue  of  Smith,  120, 
409 ;  friendship  for  the  English, 
130,  410;  captured  by  Argall,  143  ; 
her  baptism  and  marriage,  143 ; 
arrival  in  England,  152;  her  death, 

153- 

Port  Royal,  in  Canada,  settled  by  the 
Jesuits,  147;  destroyed  by  Argall, 
148. 

Port  Royal,  in  South  Carolina,  oc- 
cupied by  the  English ,"35 5  ;  aban- 
doned by  them  in  favor  of  Charles- 
town,  355  ;  occupied  by  the  Scotch 
settlers  under  Lord  Cardross,  357; 
attacked  by  the  Spaniards,  358. 

Pory,  John,  164. 

Potomac  River,  exploration  of,  122. 

Pott,  Dr.,  Deputy  Governor  of  Vir- 
ginia, 195. 

26 


4i8 


INDEX. 


POU. 

j:  outrincourt,  Baron  of,  147 ;  destruc- 
tion of  his  colony,  148. 

Powhatan,  Indian  chief,  captures 
Smith,  119;  dealings  with  the 
English,  120;  crowned  by  the  Eng- 
lish, 124;  intrigues  against  them, 
130;  Hamor's  visit  to,  145;  his 
death,  168. 

Prado,  Albert  de,  his  voyage  in  1527, 
30. 

Pnng,  his  voyage  to  Virginia,  107. 

Puritans,  see  Nonconformists. 

QUAKERS,  in  Maryland,  315,  317, 
327;  in  North  Carolina,  344. 
Quarry,  Colonel,  Deputy  Governor 
of  Maryland,  320. 
Quit-rents  in  Virginia  remitted  for 
seven  years,  187;  dispute  about, 
271 ;  in  Maryland,  left  to  the  Pro- 
prietor after  the  Revolution,  323. 

RALEIGH,  Sir  Walter,  helps  Gil- 
bert, 48 ;  his  own  attempts  at 
colonization,  56;  his  second  colo- 
ny, 69 ;  attempts  to  relieve  his  col- 
onists, 72,  107 ;  disposes  of  his  in- 
terest in  Virginia,  73. 

Ratcliffe,  a  leading  Virginia  settler, 
112,  119,  121,  123,  129;  killed  by 
the  Indians,  132. 

Ribault,  Jean,  his  settlement  in  Flor- 
ida, 90;  its  destruction,  97;  his 
death,  98. 

Rice,  introduction  of,  into  South  Caro- 
lina, 372. 

Rich,  Lord,  see  the  Earl  of  Warwick. 

Roanoke,  first  English  settlement  at, 
61 ;  second  settlement,  70. 

Roberval,  Sieur  de,  his  settlement  in 
Canada,  87. 

Roche,  Baron  de  la,  his  settlement  in 
Canada,  146. 

Roe,  Sir  Thomas,  165. 

Rolfe,  John,  marries  Pocahontas,  143. 

Rousby,  murder  of,  in  Maryland,  318. 

Russia,  voyages  to,  37. 

Rut,  his  account  of  the  voyage  in 
1527,  30- 

ST.    AUGUSTINE,    in    Florida, 
first  settlement  of,  97;   attacked 
by  the  English,  367. 
Sandford,  Robert,  his  exploration  of 

Carolina,  352. 
Sandys,  Sir  Edwin,  member  of  the 
Council  for  Virginia,  no;   his  in- 
fluence in  the  Company,  156,  165  ; 
elected  Treasurer,  158. 


sou. 

—  George,  brother  of  Sir  Edward, 
acts  as  agent  for  the  Virginian  As- 
sembly in  England,  200 ;  a  place- 
hunter,  206. 

Satouriona,  an  Indian  chief  in  Flori- 

rida,  92. 
Sayle,  William,  the  first  Governor  of 

South   Carolina,   352;    his   death, 

355- 

Servants  indented  in  Virginia,  187, 
381.     See  Slavery. 

Shaftesbury,  one  of  the  Proprietors 
of  Carolina,  329 ;  his  energy,  361 ; 
attempts  a  settlement  of  his  own, 
361. 

Sickelmore,  see  Ratcliffe. 

Silk,  production  of,  in  Virginia,  162, 
234;  in  South  Carolina,  357. 

Skene,  Alexander,  377. 

Slavery.  Felons  employed  as  slaves, 
J95>  3&2  >  Indians  enslaved  in 
South  Carolina,  359;  slaves  sup- 
plied by  kidnappers,  called  "spir- 
its," 383.;  legislation  about,  385; 
superseded  by  negro  slaves,  386; 
attempts  to  limit  by  law,  388 ;  moral 
feeling  about  slavery,  389;  status 
of  the  slave  as  determined  by  law, 
390;  proportion  of  slaves  in  the 
different  colonies,  391 ;  social  and 
economical  results  of  slavery,  ib. 

Smith,  Captain  John,  his  writings, 
101,  note,  410;  his  adventures  and 
character,  115;  captivity  among  the 
Indians,  119,  410;  President  of 
Virginia,  122  ;  returns  to  England, 

*3*' 

—  Sir  Thomas,  buys  a  share  of  Ral- 
eigh's grant,  72;  member  of  the 
Council  for  Virginia,  no;  Treas- 
urer of  the  Virginia  Company,  127 ; 
suspected  of  dishonesty,  142,  164; 
superseded  by  Sandys,  158;  his 
opposition  to  the  Company,  175. 

Smith,  agent  for  Virginia  in  England, 
240. 

Smyth,  Governor  of  Carolina,  364. 

Somers,  Sir  George,  109;  discovers 
the  Bermudas,  130 ;  arrives  in  Vir- 
ginia, 132;  his  death,  136. 

—  Matthew,  136,  172. 

—  Islands,  see  Bermudas. 

Sothel,  Governor  of  North  Carolina, 
captured  by  Algerines,  342 ;  his 
misconduct  in  North  Carolina,  343 ; 
appears  in  South  Carolina,  363. 

Soto,  Hernando  de,  Spanish  explor- 
er, 79 ;  his  failure  and  death,  81. 

Southampton,  Earl  of,  sends  ships  to 


INDEX. 


419 


SPE. 

Virginia,  105,  108;  elected  Treas- 
urer of  the  Virginia  Company,  166 ; 
preserves  the  archives,  181. 

Spelman,  Henry,  prisoner  among  the 
Indians,  162. 

Spotswood,  Governor  of  Virginia,  at- 
tempts to  mediate  during  the  re- 
bellion against  Hyde,  345. 

Stafford,  Captain,  one  of  Lane's  fol- 
lowers, 67. 

Stephens,  Governor  of  North  Caro- 

^  lina,  334. 

Stith,  William,  the  historian,  charac- 
ter of  his  work,  10 1,  note,  181. 

Stone,  William,  Governor  of  Mary- 
land, 303;  his  opposition  to  the 
Puritans,  307. 

Stourton,  Erasmus,  a  Puritan  minis- 
ter, his  attack  on  Lord  Baltimore, 
278. 

Strachey,  William,  his  writings,  128, 
note ;  132,  note. 

Stukeley,  Thomas,  his  birth  and  char- 
acter, 42;  his  scheme  for  settling 
Florida,  43. 

Susquehannock  Indians,  123,  244, 
301. 

TALBOT,  Colonel,  murders  Rous- 
by,  318. 

Thimagoa  Indians,  92. 

Thorne,  Robert,  28 ;  his  writings,  29. 

Thorpe,  George,  murdered  by  the  In- 
dians, 168. 

Tobacco,  over-cultivation  of,  in  Vir- 
ginia, 154,  190,  192,  234,  258;  used 
as  currency,  162,  193,  393 ;  disputes 
about,  between  the  Company  and 
James  I.,  166,  174;  special  legis- 
lation about,  194;  riotous  destruc- 
tion of,  261. 

Tomocomo,  an  Indian,  comes  to  Eng- 
land, 153. 

Trott,  Nicholas,  366;   attack  upon, 

377- 
Tuscarora  Indians,  war  with  North 
Carolina,  347. 

VERRAZANI,  the  navigator,  84. 
Villegagnon,  his  colony  in  Bra- 
zil, 88. 
Virginia,  discovery  of,  57;  Raleigh's 
first  colony  in,  59 ;  his  second  colo- 
ny, 69;  patent  for,  granted  by 
James  L,  109;  expedition  of  1607, 
114;  distress  of  the  colony,  130, 
137;  Penal  Code,  138;  improved 
condition  under  Dale  and  Gates, 
141;    enlargement  of  the  patent, 


WIL. 

141 ;  misgovernment  by  Argall, 
156;  first  Assembly  held,  158;  mas- 
sacre, 167;  physical  character  of 
the  country,  180;  social  and  indus- 
trial condition,  187,  201,  231,  392; 
condition  under  Wyatt  and  Yeard- 
ley,  190 ;  rebellion  against  Harvey, 
195  et  seq. ;  increase  of  population, 
201 ;  second  Indian  massacre,  209 ; 
state  of  parties,  212 ;  Puritan  immi- 
grants, 215  ;  summary  of  the  Con- 
stitution, 215-20 ;  surrender  to  Par- . 
liament,  222 ;  under  the  Common- 
wealth, 223  ;  Restoration  in,  227 ; 
attacked  by  the  Dutch,  235 ;  polit- 
ical condition,  237;  the  Long  As- 
sembly, 237 ;  grants  by  Charles  II., 
238 ;  Bacon's  rebellion,  245  et  seq. ; 
commissioners  sent  out,  255 ;  state 
of  the  Church  in,  268;  establish- 
ment of  a  college,  271  et  seq. 
Virginia  Company  first  constituted, 
108;  its  prospects,  125;  charter  of 
1609, 126;  unsatisfactory  state,  136, 
141 ;  debate  upon,  in  Parliament, 
150;  change  of  policy,  158;  im- 
proved condition,  162,  167;  mis- 
sionary schemes,  163;  intrigues 
against,  164,  170,  172,  175;  dis- 
putes with  the  king,  166,  172;  sup- 
ported by  the  colonists,  178;  the 
charter  resumed  under  a  quo  war- 
ranto, 180;  history  of  the  archives, 
181 ;  attempts  to  restore  the  Com- 
pany, 188,  199. 

T  TTANCHESE,  an  Indian,  corner 
VV    to  England,  59 ;  buried  at  Bide- 
ford,  72. 

Warwick  Earl  of,  befriends  Argall, 
*57>  J58;  hostile  to  the  Virginia 
Company,  164,  177 ;  appointed 
Chief  Commissioner  for  the  colo- 
nies, 221. 

West,-  Francis,  a  leading  Virginian, .. 
189. 

—  Joseph,  Governor  of  South  Caro- 
lina, 352,  356,  360. 

Westoe  Indians  in  South  Carolina;, 
360.  ( 

White,  John,  Governor  of  Raleigh's 
second  colony,  69 ;  returns  to  Eng- 
land, 71 ;  sails  for  Virginia  in  1588, 
72;  in  1590,  73;  buys  a  share  in 
Raleigh's  territory,  ib. 

William  III.,  assumes  the  govern- 
ment of  Maryland,  321. 

William  and  Mary,  College  of,  in  Vir- 
ginia, 270. 


420 


INDEX. 


WIL. 

Willoughby,  Sir  Hugh,  his  voyage  to 
Russia,  and  death,  38. 

Wingfield,  Edward  Maria,  President 
of  the  first  settlement  in  Virginia, 
117;  his  character,  ib. ;  deposed  by 
the  colonists,  119. 

Wingina,  or  Pemissapan,  an  Indian 
chief,  63. 

Woodward,  Dr.,  Shaftesbury's  agent 
in  South  Carolina,  352,  361. 

Wrote,  a  member  of  the  Virginia 
Company,  175. 

Wyatt,  Sir  Francis,  Governor  of  Vir- 
ginia, 189,  207. 

YAMASSEE  Indians,  war  with,  in 
South  Carolina,  373. 


ZEN. 

Yeamans,  Sir  John,  heads  a  body  of 
emigrants  from  Barbadoes  to  Cape 
Fear,  351 ;  becomes  Governor  of 
the  settlement  at  Charlestown,  355 ; 
his  death,  ib. 

Yeardley,  George,  Deputy-Governor 
of  Virginia,  154;  appointed  Gover- 
nor and  knighted,  157;  Lord  War- 
wick's intrigues  against,  165;  re- 
appointed Governor,  190;  dies, 
191. 

Young,  Captain,  sent  by  Charles  I. 
to  Virginia,  197. 

'VENO,  the  voyage  of,  18,  note. 


L,BfM?K 
JNIVER3JTY 


£\ 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 
on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 


NOV  1 9  1962 


EXT 

JAN    6'&4-*PM 


3Jan'63BB 


NMKETOttaay 


REC'D  LD 


DEC    41962 


MOV   8 '65 -8  PI 


Tm 


^A 


r\  e  - 


.1AN1C1S63 


a$*£ 


e$8 


REC'D  LD 


NOV  2  6 '63 -3  PM 


LD  21A-50m-3,'62 

(C7097sl0)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


f    «     .i    I*.**' 


#  to 


